(09-20-2017, 02:02 AM)Gointocarlton link Wrote:Firstly, I am a soccer retard.
Why are the Matildas so good and the Socceroos are so crap? Should/Could the Maltidas coach coach the Socceroos as well?
The world of womens soccer is a far cry from mens.
For instance, the national team players of most nations (even some that are considered poor) are playing elite level football, at elite clubs(predominantly european), earning elite cash, and with the elite coaching staff, physios, sports scientists, and the competition they face weekly force immense improvement in a short period of time.
The coach of the socceroos have to look at the best talent we have across the planet, and use a small sample size to create a team within a short period of time to try and get them playing a team game.
The Socceroos job is more about collecting a bunch of stars and trying to get them to play as a team.
In the womens game, the national teams of womens world soccer are barely proffesionals across the majority of competitions. Therefore you can take a team like Sydney FC's Womens side, and put them in the national team, and they would be on a similar level to most of their national teams opponents.
Its much more difficult to be competitive in that equation for men over women, because women across the world haven't been as proffesional for as long and the gulf in the level of competitiveness in the relative competitions isnt as large.
Food for thought. Ill use Germany and Spain as my examples here. The Spanish La Liga, and German Bundesliga both have roughly 18 clubs in their top flight competition. Of those clubs, only the top few have access to loads of money and the rest are relying on manufacturing their own talent. Each team would have a squad of roughly 40 players. Of those 40, at 14 clubs, they would be 90% German/Spanish (local). They spend the majority of their wages on key players. The elite local talent are pretty quickly poached to the top tier teams, and therefore there is a production line of quality players coming out of the "lesser" clubs, who are on a far superior level to our home grown talent because they are facing some of the worlds best players frequently. The gulf of resources are to do with player wages, and not necessarily coaches and facilities. Basically, 100 million for one player at the top clubs, would finance an entire squad at the lower clubs in these competitions, and beyond that, the actual coaching is no different. Therefore, their players develope faster, in environments that are more quickly emulated at national level, and on the few occasions the national team meet, they dont fly 20 hours to hook up with some of their teamates.
The only nations that I know of that produce elite level talent without the money in the competitions are in South America. Even then, they have such a large talent pool and not very diluted because they tend to play the leading national sport, and once again have such a large production line of players going abroad to europe, that they can choose a national team solely based in europe meaning that they have greater chances for success. Australias best 3 will play in good leagues in europe, and the rest are in second tier competitions around europe or back in the A league, where the level of competitiveness isnt as great as lets say the Spanish 2nd division.
