Babels speedy recovery ends up costing us

[Dhav]

Erm, FIFA don't recognise the Olympics therefore you don't have to send players there.

Barca are refusing (understandably) to send Ronaldinho and Messi.

Although in this case i don't think it'd actually do Babel any harm to be involved confidence-wise.

Mascherano on the other hand.

Exactly, the only problem with refusing to let them go is you risk upsetting and isolating the player if he wants to participate in the tournament.

Funnily the BBC say "The Olympics is the only significant title Brazil have never won". Is this is a significant title? It's a youth tournament that is not even FIFA recognised.

[dww]

It is significant because many of the best sides in the world care about it and want to win it.

[Dhav]

It is significant because many of the best sides in the world care about it and want to win it.

Perhaps, but in my book it ranks very low on the list of priorities if you're a footballer.

If you're an athlete, or a gymnast, or a wightlifter or something, the Olympics is the pinnacle of your career. If you're a footballer however, or a tennis player, boxer or pretty much any other professional athlete, it would probably be really low on the list of priorities. We're talking about a youth tournmanent here. If it was open to all the best players you could say fair enough, it is an important competition, but what we are talking about is one that is highly particular. Dave, we're not talking about the "best sides in the world" here, we're talking about the best under-23 sides with a few over-age players thrown in for good measure. The British aren't even allowed to compete. In top end professional football, where does the Olympics rank in the list of importance? Do supporters celebrate winning it by going out in to the streets with their flags, have open-top bus parades etc when they win the gold medal?

I see very little merit in this competition to be honest with you. It's a curiosity and nothing more.

[dww]

I understand what you are saying but what I mean is that the countries which provide the best national teams tend to also care about the Olympics. Just because it is less well thought of in the UK doesn't really reduce it's importance for players from elsewhere. It is obviously not as big as a world cup say but the teams who compete take it seriously.

I can see your point of view and I would probably alter the regulations for what is permissible as currently it just seems a bit weird but I do think it is a good competition. Where does it rank - no idea really as I don't know much about how much people care about the Copa America in comparison say. It is however the only truly global competition except for the world cup and is just as rare so I would say that winning it would be a real boost to player and that it is much higher in priority than international friendlies, underage world cups/euros etc. It is an adjunct to the normal calendar but I think it is far from worthless.

It does provide a scheduling problem considering the fact it is not directly related to the footballing authorities but then again the Euros interrupted the Russian league. I think there will have to be some sort of accommodation made for this in the future but I don't thin that will ever be to get rid of football at the Olympics and I think it is unfair to put the onus on individual players.

[Morph]

Erm, FIFA don't recognise the Olympics therefore you don't have to send players there.

Barca are refusing (understandably) to send Ronaldinho and Messi.

Although in this case i don't think it'd actually do Babel any harm to be involved confidence-wise.

Mascherano on the other hand.

You can't refuse to let an under 23 player go so Babel and lucas would be going no matter what and I don't think we would have missed them too much at that stage of the season, we could however have refused to let Mascherano go as he's overage and if I was the boss I would have.

[Dhav]

I understand what you are saying but what I mean is that the countries which provide the best national teams tend to also care about the Olympics. Just because it is less well thought of in the UK doesn't really reduce it's importance for players from elsewhere. It is obviously not as big as a world cup say but the teams who compete take it seriously.

I can see your point of view and I would probably alter the regulations for what is permissible as currently it just seems a bit weird but I do think it is a good competition. Where does it rank - no idea really as I don't know much about how much people care about the Copa America in comparison say. It is however the only truly global competition except for the world cup and is just as rare so I would say that winning it would be a real boost to player and that it is much higher in priority than international friendlies, underage world cups/euros etc. It is an adjunct to the normal calendar but I think it is far from worthless.

It does provide a scheduling problem considering the fact it is not directly related to the footballing authorities but then again the Euros interrupted the Russian league. I think there will have to be some sort of accommodation made for this in the future but I don't thin that will ever be to get rid of football at the Olympics and I think it is unfair to put the onus on individual players.

I too understand what you’re saying, and as always there is a lot of sense there. But I’d be interested to know how much interest generally there is in this competition, perhaps by reference to tv audience figures and attendances. I remember there being lots of empty seats at the Athens Olympics, and although the Sydney, Atlanta and Barca Olympics largely passed me by in terms of the football tournaments, I’m willing to bet it was the same there. Having said that, I do remember watching Tevez set the 2004 competition alight, which was entertaining, and so there is some merit to these tournaments. But seriously, how much wider appeal is there?, I’m willing to bet the interest is lower in South America, Africa etc than the interest in their own regional competitions.

If it is so important, all-encompassing, global, then why the half-way measures of only allowing three players in each squad over the age of 23? Why not open up the competition to all? The truth is that there is no appetite for this competition at the global level when there is so much other football going on which takes precedent. That’s why this over-age players measure has been introduced so the competition has some quality and some recognisable players involved, while they don’t wholesale piss off the football community at large. Yes, it’s important to some, but it is not universally accepted, and that coupled with the fact that it is not open to all-comers (both in terms of countries and professional players) and is essentially a youth competition makes me conclude that this is not, objectively speaking, a significant tournament.

It seems ridiculous to me that football clubs are at the whim of the International Olympic Committee in that they cannot use their players at a time that suits the IOC but is a key time in the clubs’ seasons when they need their players. What responsibility, in all consciousness, should the clubs have to such a body? The rules on this need to seriously be re-thought.

[dww]

To be honest the stupid half measures seem to me a daft compromise which can't in the end benefit anyone (apart possibly for inexperienced players called up). I'd agree people need to think about it but I'm not sure that the self interests of football clubs is necessarily the thing that should dictate the solution.

[Joe King]

He will the first two games of the season against Sunderland and Middlesborough.

With Villa coming (either or ) we should be fine

[ronanm]

I am sure this has been discussed elsewhere, but why the f^ck are professional footballers/tennisers allowed at the olympics? Sure, athletes do earn appearnce money and advertising revenue but that's different ffs. Football shouldn't even be at the olympics - or if so, should be played by amateurs. Same with tennis. What a joke.

[Dhav]

To be honest the stupid half measures seem to me a daft compromise which can't in the end benefit anyone (apart possibly for inexperienced players called up). I'd agree people need to think about it but I'm not sure that the self interests of football clubs is necessarily the thing that should dictate the solution.

Like it or not, the clubs' needs will have be taken into account when or if a re-think happens, and it should IMO be paramount in any discussions and/or proposed solutions. At the end of the day, the clubs are the ones who will be most affected by players leaving to play in international tournaments during the season. It's asking a bit much to expect clubs to let their players go during the season to play in a youth tournament so they miss club games, pay the wages throughout and foot the bill and the loss if the player comes back injured. Ludicrous.

I know people will draw parallels with the African Nations Cup, and while there are similarities at least with that you very much know the state of play when you buy the player, and it is an international tournament in good standing as it were. And you don't get random players being picked wildcard style to play even though they wouldn't ordinarily be eligible. Seeing as it is being played in odd years anyway I see no reason why they can't just move it to the summer and play the games in the evening so it is not too hot.

[dww]

I was actually deliberately avoiding the topic of the ANC for those reasons, a comparison is too thorny for my liking.

I think an interesting comparison is with cricket and Rugby where the clubs just have to accept the loss of international players. There are obviously big differences as to how the money is distributed but then I'm not sure that all sporting issues should be resolved by financial concerns. I completely agree that the fact no one can plan transfers is actually an issue with the current setup (and I agree with you that this needs to be sorted - maybe each country having to give a long list of slightly more than they can pick older players a year before or something might at least improve matters).

I accept the clubs should have a say I'm just not sure that they should be the final arbiters or that a solution made to suit them would be the best for football as a whole. I think a strong Olympic tournament with sensible player regulations is potentially a good thing but agree with you that the current setup means that it has the potential to bias domestic leagues and that is **** and needs looking in to.

[Dhav]

I was actually deliberately avoiding the topic of the ANC for those reasons, a comparison is too thorny for my liking.

I think an interesting comparison is with cricket and Rugby where the clubs just have to accept the loss of international players. There are obviously big differences as to how the money is distributed but then I'm not sure that all sporting issues should be resolved by financial concerns. I completely agree that the fact no one can plan transfers is actually an issue with the current setup (and I agree with you that this needs to be sorted - maybe each country having to give a long list of slightly more than they can pick older players a year before or something might at least improve matters).

I accept the clubs should have a say I'm just not sure that they should be the final arbiters or that a solution made to suit them would be the best for football as a whole. I think a strong Olympic tournament with sensible player regulations is potentially a good thing but agree with you that the current setup means that it has the potential to bias domestic leagues and that is **** and needs looking in to.

At the end of the day, while the Olympics is being played during the football season there will always be problems. As far as I'm aware the Olympics don't clash with any major athletics meets, gymnastic or weightlifting competitions, tennis tournaments etc. Now I'm not proposing that the football season is moved to accommodate the Olympics, but why can't the Olympic football tournament itself be moved back just a couple of weeks, even if it doesn't coincide with the Olympics themselves? If they're not willing to do that because they want to stick to this Olympic ideal bollocks and play all competitions during the Olympics, then they should either consider increasing the preliminary/qualification stages thus shortening the competition at the event, or say that senior players can't be called until the latter (perhaps knockout stages) of the competition.

[Johnny]

If AC can hold back the "World player of the year" then every other team should hold back their best players.The Olympics should be held on a year when the World Cup or Euros are not being held.

[Morph]

If AC can hold back the "World player of the year" then every other team should hold back their best players.The Olympics should be held on a year when the World Cup or Euros are not being held.

I doubt the Olympics would switch years just to cater to some footy tournaments, however, it wouldn't be impossible to see them happen maybe 5 or 6 weeks earlier, which I think would be good for all involved hopefully.

[Johnny]

I doubt the Olympics would switch years just to cater to some footy tournaments, however, it wouldn't be impossible to see them happen maybe 5 or 6 weeks earlier, which I think would be good for all involved hopefully.

Or run along side the Euro`s ,one being for the big boys and the other for the under 18`s.

how can the olympics be allowed to clash with the 1st few games of most countries seasons.