|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xWow AFL have great Athletes, who are we exactly measuring them against, what benchmark. It's easy to say you are the best in the world at something when you are the only country playing the sport. I am not saying some players are not Athletic but how do you measure it. The closest I come to is when we play Ireland in International rules when the best of our Athleticism doesn't help us one iota. Let's not forget a good majority of these Irish players are made up AFL players in Australia and semi-pro Gaelic players. The odds should be heavily stacked in Australia's favourite should it not. If more countries were playing AFL I can guarantee you we wouldn't be the best nation in AFL and the question might be raised about ways we can get more Athletic players away from football, rugby and NRL so they can play AFL. That's a really misleading example. For one thing, it's not Aussie Rules, they're playing, it's a hybrid competition. And Ireland (albeit without a professional competition, I do believe) are used to playing Gaelic football with a round ball. And besides, some years Australia win, others Ireland win. Meaningless data. +x[quote]This whole argument is based on a false premace and perpetuated by the AFL and swallowed up those who believe the propaganda. It's impossible to say that for one AFL is the recipient of the best Athletes in Australia. You have no way of knowing that until a player has reached physical maturity. Yes it would great if more players chose football but we already have more players to choose from than AFL and in the states of NSW and QLD there are virtually no players which to choose from for the AFL.
Sorry but none of this is based on any false premise. It is possible to say that the AFL has access to the majority of the best athletes in VIC/SA/WA/TAS/NT (i.e. most of Australia). Going from the best times run for 20m at AFL draft camps averaged out for about 13 years up until 2012, the best AFL footballer would run 2.824 seconds average. That's bloody quick. To put that into perspective, the average for the best in the NBA draft for 22.86m was 3.028 seconds. And, usually, AFL players are drafted at a younger age than NBA players by a few years. Then, as I say, some of Australia's best athletes in international sports came quite close to playing AFL (Patty Mills, Ben Simmonds and Lleyton Hewitt, for example). That's rather telling. While not conclusive, it would indicate there's every chance a number of people in the AFL could have gone down the path of other professional sports. This seems to be the case a lot with cricket, basketball and the type of sports for which the Olympics is the biggest competition. Olympic athletes, by and large, don't get paid anywhere near as much as AFL players, so there's a big incentive there. Then Kyle Chalmers, for example, who won the gold medal for the men's 100m freestyle in Rio has plans on playing AFL after his swimming career. And then you just have to think about it in context. In VIC/SA/WA/TAS/NT, AFL dominates the headlines and the topic of conversation at schools, work, etc. Even in the off-season. So, what a surprise, it has traditionally had most of the best athletes in those parts of Australia. I realise it's easy to go about having undiluted hatred of the AFL. They bring it upon themselves and they do tend to have an inferiority complex as their sport will never have any international presence. But it's more constructive to accept that the sport does actually have gifted athletes and to ask oneself how football might turn the tide going forward.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RBBAnonymous
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
This whole argument is based on a false premace and perpetuated by the AFL and swallowed up those who believe the propaganda. It's impossible to say that for one AFL is the recipient of the best Athletes in Australia. You have no way of knowing that until a player has reached physical maturity. Yes it would great if more players chose football but we already have more players to choose from than AFL and in the states of NSW and QLD there are virtually no players which to choose from for the AFL. Wow AFL have great Athletes, who are we exactly measuring them against, what benchmark. It's easy to say you are the best in the world at something when you are the only country playing the sport. I am not saying some players are not Athletic but how do you measure it. The closest I come to is when we play Ireland in International rules when the best of our Athleticism doesn't help us one iota. Let's not forget a good majority of these Irish players are made up AFL players in Australia and semi-pro Gaelic players. The odds should be heavily stacked in Australia's favourite should it not. If more countries were playing AFL I can guarantee you we wouldn't be the best nation in AFL and the question might be raised about ways we can get more Athletic players away from football, rugby and NRL so they can play AFL.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+xI think we're coming from different perspective here hence the misunderstanding. I don't think either party is wrong when looked at from both perspectives.Quick flick coming from a perspective that we lack a greater pool of athletes due to more sports for the cream of the crop to be divided amongst.Whilst the few others arguing that it doesn't matter how deep the athlete pool is, when technical ability is our deficiency. It appears to be a chicken or egg first kind of argument. In my opinion opening up more/greater pathways to A professional careers is the first step and will go along way to changing the perspective of young footballers in Australia. With the turnover of an AFL team list each year, and 50-70 kids getting drafted each year, young footballers(and basketballers, etc) can see a lot more reward for a lot less effort heading down that path than sticking with their preferred sport. In my opinion switching to league or union is harder really only due to the size you need to be to play those sports. Agree entirely. Even with most of the population behind the sport, we could still do shit (e.g. China, even India) without the right infrastructure. Grassroots, pathways, multiple professional tiers, fewer cracks through which people fall, eventually promotion and relegation are just as important. I've never suggested otherwise. But as others seemed to pose the main question as athleticism vs technique, I will get hung up on that point- trying to reframe the question. As I say, to do really well, we need the talent pool to be as big as possible. Top post from you.
|
|
|
|
|
bigpoppa
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.6K,
Visits: 0
|
I think we're coming from different perspective here hence the misunderstanding. I don't think either party is wrong when looked at from both perspectives.
Quick flick coming from a perspective that we lack a greater pool of athletes due to more sports for the cream of the crop to be divided amongst.
Whilst the few others arguing that it doesn't matter how deep the athlete pool is, when technical ability is our deficiency.
It appears to be a chicken or egg first kind of argument.
In my opinion opening up more/greater pathways to A professional careers is the first step and will go along way to changing the perspective of young footballers in Australia.
With the turnover of an AFL team list each year, and 50-70 kids getting drafted each year, young footballers(and basketballers, etc) can see a lot more reward for a lot less effort heading down that path than sticking with their preferred sport.
In my opinion switching to league or union is harder really only due to the size you need to be to play those sports.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x@quickflick I am putting my arguments forward in the context of the article written by the AFL journalist. His argument is that football is missing out due to the Athletes being reaped by the AFL, which is absolute nonsense. In regards to your below statement, I agree with you but I would always put more importance on technique. "I repeat it's not a question of technique versus athleticism. It's a question of which countries can draw upon the best combinations of technique plus athleticism." Neither you nor he is completely right nor wrong, imo, with all due respect. The journalist is partially right. Undoubtedly, if many, many, many more children (especially those with the natural athleticism of Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield, Cyril Rioli, Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti, etc.) had grown up playing football rather than Aussie Rules, would Australian football have reaped the rewards? Hell yes. I've said as much repeatedly. Benjamin has said as much. It doesn't make you disloyal to football in Australia to notice this. The trick is to work out how football can turn the tide. You're right in suggesting that if you pit very gifted footballers against very athletic fellas (who have no football skills) then technique should overcome the athleticism. But this isn't the question. It misrepresents the reality. It's a false dichotomy. The reality is that top class footballers (for most positions) have both technique and athleticism.
|
|
|
|
|
RBBAnonymous
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
@quickflick I am putting my arguments forward in the context of the article written by the AFL journalist. His argument is that football is missing out due to the Athletes being reaped by the AFL, which is absolute nonsense. In regards to your below statement, I agree with you but I would always put more importance on technique. "I repeat it's not a question of technique versus athleticism. It's a question of which countries can draw upon the best combinations of technique plus athleticism."
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
I should correct my last paragraph.
The relatively smaller pool of footballers who have technique plus athleticism is one of the problems.
Also a problem are lack of player pathways, youth academies, development, football culture and so on.
But when you add all these things up, it hardly alleviates things.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x@citysam thankyou that is basically the gist of what I was trying to say in my previous post. I should've taken the time to explain my reasoning. Even though football skills and smarts is 'built'. It is built through a lifetime of practice in where by it becomes second nature or 'natural'.Athleticism and genetics in most cases won't come into play until teens/early adulthood when a humans growth is at its peak. I'll admit genetics will limit ones athleticism to an extent but with proper training and coaching, especially if we are talking the elite level, it won't take long for someone to get faster and stronger, 'built' into an athlete. I don't really think this is true, sorry. Some people will never really have much chance of becoming athletic; i.e. fast and agile. They will never be able to run 100m in less than, say, 12 seconds. They'll never be able to accelerate out of traffic very quickly. Or to turn on a penny. It doesn't mean they can't become quicker, more agile, more flexible, or develop very good aerobic fitness levels, or gain excellent core strength. They can learn to hold their own in football. In very technical things, such as swimming they can improve a lot and learn to swim faster than most people or through years of training become a black belt in various martial arts. The ordinary person can do these things. But elite levels of athletic ability are basically innate. And, it's overwhelmingly the case that footballers up front, out wide, and as goalkeepers have these elite levels of athletic ability. I'm not downplaying the importance of true football skills which are only gained through years of practice. I'm saying that countries which have access to footballers who have those skills who are also world-class athletes have a massive advantage. No one is downplaying Athleticism but the most important aspect is touch, technique and skill. A team full of skilled technicians who may not be the best Athletes will always beat a team of Athletes who have no skills. Eg A Liverpool over 45 team will beat a team of Athletic AFL players in a game of football. I know that is an extreme example but the basic premise holds true. Of course. But that misses the point. The point is that elite levels of athleticism are virtually requisite for world-class ability in most (but not all) positions in football. Very rarely are there world-class footballers in those positions who do not have such levels of athletic ability and touch, technique and skill. They almost always need it all. The fact that Australia has access to such a relatively small pool of footballers who have that athletic ability in the first place is part of the reason we struggle to produce world-class footballers. You need a large pool of footballers who have it all because the law of averages suggests that only a small proportion will make it. We don't have that pool. This is precisely why we end up with a bunch of footballers in positions which require both athleticism and football ability who lack one or the other. Hence all the problem positions for the NT now. No I totally disagree. We are lacking because of technical and skill deficiencies. There are plenty of countries around the world with much smaller talent pools than ours who produce a better footballer. Its all down to technical ability. No, it's both. Those smaller countries still have football as the most popular sport. It's down to technical ability and (for most positions) athleticism. Don't get me wrong its ideal to have both but we are not being beaten by other nations because of our athletic ability, we are being beaten because of our technical deficiencies. The players in the national team are more than decent athletes and in an athletic sense would hold their own against many nations, but where we always let ourselves down is in technical ability. A country like Japan is a good example. We probably have advantages in Athleticism, height, strength etc and while the differences aren't great there are differences. Its not say that the Japanese players are not great Athletes either. But on a technical sense they are better than us and will win the majority of games between the two of us if things stay the same. Technique > Athleticism and it always will be. But I don't regard height or even strength as characteristic of athletic superiority in football. That's why I keep writing speed and agility. We don't have superiority compared to Japan in terms of speed and agility. I can only guess I'm not explaining my viewpoint that well (which is a worry). It's not a question of technique vs athleticism, at all. Sure if there was a really contrived situation whereby a bunch of Brazilian futsal players who weren't all that athletic played against a bunch of AFL footballers, the futsal players would probably win comfortably. But does that kind of situation reflect the reality of football? Hell no. International football is the best Brazilian footballers versus the best Australian footballers, for example. I repeat it's not a question of technique versus athleticism. It's a question of which countries can draw upon the best combinations of technique plus athleticism. Germany, France, Italy, Spain, England, Brazil, Argentina, Belgium, Japan, South Korea, most of Europe and most of Africa can realistically hope that they will be able to draw from a pool of footballers who have technique plus athleticism. Australia cannot (at this stage). And that, my friend, is why we constantly have a situation whereby we tend to have great athletes who aren't all that good at football or decent footballers who aren't all that special athletes (compared to counterparts from those sort of countries). Not such an issue in central midfield (and by fluke we have good 'footballers' in central midfield, but elsewhere it is an issue).
|
|
|
|
|
RBBAnonymous
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x@citysam thankyou that is basically the gist of what I was trying to say in my previous post. I should've taken the time to explain my reasoning. Even though football skills and smarts is 'built'. It is built through a lifetime of practice in where by it becomes second nature or 'natural'.Athleticism and genetics in most cases won't come into play until teens/early adulthood when a humans growth is at its peak. I'll admit genetics will limit ones athleticism to an extent but with proper training and coaching, especially if we are talking the elite level, it won't take long for someone to get faster and stronger, 'built' into an athlete. I don't really think this is true, sorry. Some people will never really have much chance of becoming athletic; i.e. fast and agile. They will never be able to run 100m in less than, say, 12 seconds. They'll never be able to accelerate out of traffic very quickly. Or to turn on a penny. It doesn't mean they can't become quicker, more agile, more flexible, or develop very good aerobic fitness levels, or gain excellent core strength. They can learn to hold their own in football. In very technical things, such as swimming they can improve a lot and learn to swim faster than most people or through years of training become a black belt in various martial arts. The ordinary person can do these things. But elite levels of athletic ability are basically innate. And, it's overwhelmingly the case that footballers up front, out wide, and as goalkeepers have these elite levels of athletic ability. I'm not downplaying the importance of true football skills which are only gained through years of practice. I'm saying that countries which have access to footballers who have those skills who are also world-class athletes have a massive advantage. No one is downplaying Athleticism but the most important aspect is touch, technique and skill. A team full of skilled technicians who may not be the best Athletes will always beat a team of Athletes who have no skills. Eg A Liverpool over 45 team will beat a team of Athletic AFL players in a game of football. I know that is an extreme example but the basic premise holds true. Of course. But that misses the point. The point is that elite levels of athleticism are virtually requisite for world-class ability in most (but not all) positions in football. Very rarely are there world-class footballers in those positions who do not have such levels of athletic ability and touch, technique and skill. They almost always need it all. The fact that Australia has access to such a relatively small pool of footballers who have that athletic ability in the first place is part of the reason we struggle to produce world-class footballers. You need a large pool of footballers who have it all because the law of averages suggests that only a small proportion will make it. We don't have that pool. This is precisely why we end up with a bunch of footballers in positions which require both athleticism and football ability who lack one or the other. Hence all the problem positions for the NT now. No I totally disagree. We are lacking because of technical and skill deficiencies. There are plenty of countries around the world with much smaller talent pools than ours who produce a better footballer. Its all down to technical ability. No, it's both. Those smaller countries still have football as the most popular sport. It's down to technical ability and (for most positions) athleticism. Don't get me wrong its ideal to have both but we are not being beaten by other nations because of our athletic ability, we are being beaten because of our technical deficiencies. The players in the national team are more than decent athletes and in an athletic sense would hold their own against many nations, but where we always let ourselves down is in technical ability. A country like Japan is a good example. We probably have advantages in Athleticism, height, strength etc and while the differences aren't great there are differences. Its not say that the Japanese players are not great Athletes either. But on a technical sense they are better than us and will win the majority of games between the two of us if things stay the same. Technique > Athleticism and it always will be.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x@ quickflick "Australian football needs access to the best Australian athletes there are" ... no it doesn't, it absoloutly doesn't. It just needs access to people wanting to play their game. The "best atheletes" don't factor into any of their needs It needs both. The former will be the consequence of the latter. Tell me, how many of Cristiano Ronaldo, Leo Messi, Arjen Robben, Gareth Bale, Thierry Henry and so on are not (or were not) world-class athletes? The fact of the matter is it's very unusual for a world-class footballer who plays in the role of striker, fantasista, winger, wingback, fullback or goalkeeper not to be a world-class athlete. That accounts for most of the park. Legitimately every single athlete across every single sport on the planet is a good athlete. Athletes are created by vigorous training, balance will improve, hand eye coordination, fitness, strength and even the ability to accelerate faster can be improved by training and countless more aspects to it are all abilities the individual improved upon in the journey. Ronaldo is the perfect example, do you think he sat on his arse all day and was allowed to do so because of his genetics and still be an absolutely incredible athlete? The answer is no, he trained to such a state to improve and maintain himself at such a masterful athletic ability. Imo, that's not nuanced enough. There's a distinction that needs to be drawn between footballers such as Cristiano Ronaldo and Paul Scholes. Both have played world-class football. But one is a world-class athlete in terms of speed, agility and so on. The other did so brilliantly while not being particularly athletic. Central midfield being more congested it places more weight on football IQ (which Cristiano Ronaldo also has in spades, to be clear). Of course Cristiano Ronaldo has done a hell of a lot work to hone his athletic abilities. But he's still innately quicker and more athletic than most people. There are thousands of footballers alone who are quicker than Ronaldo and athletically superior, the difference is a large portion of them are hacks at the sport. Ronaldo when he came on the scene was this skinny, weak little kid with some pace and superb football technique. He trained and soon became not only quicker but strong and even more technically gifted. Point is Ronaldo made himself the incredible athlete he is today as have the rest of them but what separates them all is footballing ability. Sam, sorry but I disagree with the gist of this (although parts of it are correct, imo). Cristiano Ronaldo is still in the same ballpark as the majority of those footballers who are athletically superior. Whereas, ostensibly, other footballers cannot go through the gears as quickly as he can, he's in the upper echelon of fast and agile footballers. Then there are footballers who are just as athletic (or more) but lack the skill, technical ability, football IQ and mental strength, etc. Those are faster/more agile but not as good at football. As he's still very athletic, they don't have such a big athletic advantage for it to make them superior. The point is that, for specific positions, world-class footballers have the football ability and football smarts (gained through years of training and great coaching) and the athletic ability (which, although it can be improved and requires lots of work, is largely innate). As I say, how many of Cristiano Ronaldo, Leo Messi, Gareth Bale, Arjen Robben, Neymar, Philippe Coutinho, Willian, Eden Hazard, Jordi Alba, Dani Alves, Thierry Henry, Michael Owen, etc. are not (or were not) exceedingly fast and agile? The average person can't realistically hope to match their levels of speed/agility through any amount of training. The point you are missing is every single person who plays sport on this planet is a great athlete and none were born that way, some may have advantages but every single one of them had to train their way to be efficient from a young age. And for footballers the key athletic ability for all these positions you say athleticism is necessary is balance and balance is trained and aspects like acceleration and speed you run with the ball at your feet is improved with it. Categorically disagree with the first sentence (until the comma). Firstly, there are some sportspeople who aren't naturally that athletic (although they do train to become exceptionally fit). In football, it's possible to get away with this in central midfield positions, in particular. Hence, there's a bit of a difference in the kind of athleticism you watch in somebody such as Luka Modric compared to Gareth Bale. In central midfield, it's less important to be super athletic. Secondly, with the roles which do require supreme levels of athleticism, an awful lot of it is innate (at least at the elite level). Yes, without nurture, they can't get to elite levels. But it's also nature. Ordinary people can improve (and in very technical things, such as swimming and martial arts, become very proficient). But at world-class level for most things, it's exceedingly rare that the best lack natural athleticism.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]@ quickflick "Australian football needs access to the best Australian athletes there are" ... no it doesn't, it absoloutly doesn't. It just needs access to people wanting to play their game. The "best atheletes" don't factor into any of their needs It needs both. The former will be the consequence of the latter. Tell me, how many of Cristiano Ronaldo, Leo Messi, Arjen Robben, Gareth Bale, Thierry Henry and so on are not (or were not) world-class athletes? The fact of the matter is it's very unusual for a world-class footballer who plays in the role of striker, fantasista, winger, wingback, fullback or goalkeeper not to be a world-class athlete. That accounts for most of the park. Legitimately every single athlete across every single sport on the planet is a good athlete. Athletes are created by vigorous training, balance will improve, hand eye coordination, fitness, strength and even the ability to accelerate faster can be improved by training and countless more aspects to it are all abilities the individual improved upon in the journey. Ronaldo is the perfect example, do you think he sat on his arse all day and was allowed to do so because of his genetics and still be an absolutely incredible athlete? The answer is no, he trained to such a state to improve and maintain himself at such a masterful athletic ability. Imo, that's not nuanced enough. There's a distinction that needs to be drawn between footballers such as Cristiano Ronaldo and Paul Scholes. Both have played world-class football. But one is a world-class athlete in terms of speed, agility and so on. The other did so brilliantly while not being particularly athletic. Central midfield being more congested it places more weight on football IQ (which Cristiano Ronaldo also has in spades, to be clear). Of course Cristiano Ronaldo has done a hell of a lot work to hone his athletic abilities. But he's still innately quicker and more athletic than most people. There are thousands of footballers alone who are quicker than Ronaldo and athletically superior, the difference is a large portion of them are hacks at the sport. Ronaldo when he came on the scene was this skinny, weak little kid with some pace and superb football technique. He trained and soon became not only quicker but strong and even more technically gifted. Point is Ronaldo made himself the incredible athlete he is today as have the rest of them but what separates them all is footballing ability. , sorry but I disagree with the gist of this (although parts of it are correct, imo). Cristiano Ronaldo is still in the same ballpark as the majority of those footballers who are athletically superior. Whereas, ostensibly, other footballers cannot go through the gears as quickly as he can, he's in the upper echelon of fast and agile footballers. Then there are footballers who are just as athletic (or more) but lack the skill, technical ability, football IQ and mental strength, etc. Those are faster/more agile but not as good at football. As he's still very athletic, they don't have such a big athletic advantage for it to make them superior. The point is that, for specific positions, world-class footballers have the football ability and football smarts (gained through years of training and great coaching) and the athletic ability (which, although it can be improved and requires lots of work, is largely innate). As I say, how many of Cristiano Ronaldo, Leo Messi, Gareth Bale, Arjen Robben, Neymar, Philippe Coutinho, Willian, Eden Hazard, Jordi Alba, Dani Alves, Thierry Henry, Michael Owen, etc. are not (or were not) exceedingly fast and agile? The average person can't realistically hope to match their levels of speed/agility through any amount of training. Ronaldo was not a special athlete when he came on the scene, he made himself a great athlete. Messi isn't even that fast but his ridiculous technical ability allows him to accelerate faster with the ball all gathered by training. Bale is a great athlete which like Ronaldo moulded himself to the player he is now, Robben likewise is quick as are i'd say about a few hundred thousand Australian footballers at any age but technical ability made him what he is. Neymar same as above, Coutinho isn't even quick nor strong but has supreme technical ability allows him to move freely and quicker than most. Cristiano Ronaldo, Leo Messi, Garth Bale, Arjen Robben are also exceedingly quick (or at the very least have exceptional acceleration, as you said). Neymar and Philippe Coutinho are also very quick and, when their agility is factored in, top-class athletes by any reasonable definition. Yes Ronaldo and Bale trained hard to become more athletic. So did Usain Bolt. So did Cathy Freeman. But they're still genetically advantaged. It's patently ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Obviously, they'd be nowhere without their footballing ability. But that doesn't render their innate athleticism unimportant. It's crucial.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x@citysam thankyou that is basically the gist of what I was trying to say in my previous post. I should've taken the time to explain my reasoning. Even though football skills and smarts is 'built'. It is built through a lifetime of practice in where by it becomes second nature or 'natural'.Athleticism and genetics in most cases won't come into play until teens/early adulthood when a humans growth is at its peak. I'll admit genetics will limit ones athleticism to an extent but with proper training and coaching, especially if we are talking the elite level, it won't take long for someone to get faster and stronger, 'built' into an athlete. I don't really think this is true, sorry. Some people will never really have much chance of becoming athletic; i.e. fast and agile. They will never be able to run 100m in less than, say, 12 seconds. They'll never be able to accelerate out of traffic very quickly. Or to turn on a penny. It doesn't mean they can't become quicker, more agile, more flexible, or develop very good aerobic fitness levels, or gain excellent core strength. They can learn to hold their own in football. In very technical things, such as swimming they can improve a lot and learn to swim faster than most people or through years of training become a black belt in various martial arts. The ordinary person can do these things. But elite levels of athletic ability are basically innate. And, it's overwhelmingly the case that footballers up front, out wide, and as goalkeepers have these elite levels of athletic ability. I'm not downplaying the importance of true football skills which are only gained through years of practice. I'm saying that countries which have access to footballers who have those skills who are also world-class athletes have a massive advantage. No one is downplaying Athleticism but the most important aspect is touch, technique and skill. A team full of skilled technicians who may not be the best Athletes will always beat a team of Athletes who have no skills. Eg A Liverpool over 45 team will beat a team of Athletic AFL players in a game of football. I know that is an extreme example but the basic premise holds true. Of course. But that misses the point. The point is that elite levels of athleticism are virtually requisite for world-class ability in most (but not all) positions in football. Very rarely are there world-class footballers in those positions who do not have such levels of athletic ability and touch, technique and skill. They almost always need it all. The fact that Australia has access to such a relatively small pool of footballers who have that athletic ability in the first place is part of the reason we struggle to produce world-class footballers. You need a large pool of footballers who have it all because the law of averages suggests that only a small proportion will make it. We don't have that pool. This is precisely why we end up with a bunch of footballers in positions which require both athleticism and football ability who lack one or the other. Hence all the problem positions for the NT now. No I totally disagree. We are lacking because of technical and skill deficiencies. There are plenty of countries around the world with much smaller talent pools than ours who produce a better footballer. Its all down to technical ability. No, it's both. Those smaller countries still have football as the most popular sport. It's down to technical ability and (for most positions) athleticism.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xAFL can take the athletes. After all it's all they have. I'll settle for the skillful sportspeople, I will go on for watching the very best athletes every four years, the AFL can have the leftovers from the olympics. With the utmost respect, this post suggests a misunderstanding of the concepts of skill, technique and athleticism. Relative to sports such as football, cricket and tennis, Aussie Rules does not set so much store by technique (or tactical awareness). But does that mean that the best AFL footballers aren't skillful? No. If anything, it compensates for this by putting additional focus on things such as skill and athleticism. That's why it's not unheard of for someone who has never played Aussie Rules to take it up as an adult and be able to play (with success) in the AFL. It relies on natural skills rather than the kind of technical ability and tactical awareness which are almost always only gained through hours and hours of practice from a fairly young age. In a nutshell, skill in AFL is based almost entirely on athletic ability. In football, it varies. In some parts of the park, skill is based almost entirely on technical ability and tactical awareness. In other parts of the park, it's based on a combination of technical ability, tactical awareness and athletic ability (particularly speed and agility). The thing is that heaps of the best footballers have it all. And the AFL does get a disproportionately large amount of the best athletes in Australia (or gets near them). Imagine if AFL footballers such as Cyril Rioli, Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield, Sam Mitchell and Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti had grown up in households where football was the most popular sport. Imagine if they had been brought up playing football from a young age and coached very well. These are some absolutely world-class athletes and (as AFL footballers go) have very good game awareness, it seems. I wager there's every chance Australia would have Brazilian, German and even Italian defences very worried. Imagine if Tom Rogic and Aaron Mooy could construct passages of play with those kind of footballers. Look at basketball. Patty Mills and Ben Simmonds are both in the NBA. Patty is a superbly gifted athlete and a world-class point guard while Ben Simmonds has the potential to be a once-in-a-generation talent. Both played elite junior Aussie Rules and Patty very nearly went to the AIS on a scholarship for it. Australian basketball has benefited immeasurably from those kind of guys (plus Matthew Dellavedova, Andrew Bogut and so on). Imagine if Australian football could draw upon some of these guys who are so athletic and have great match awareness. The concept is that the Socceroos does have some great athletes Leckie, Smith, Irvine & before them the likes of Cahill & Emerton, all superb athletes, the problem we have is that we don't produce enough touch players. So having all these wonderful AFL athletes in Football would matter little if they cannot master the 1st touch & technique of the Brazilians & very few Australians have been able to master it. Yep, agreed. But if they did master first touch and technique, then having all these wonderful AFL athletes in football would make Australia a world-class football nation, in all likelihood. The point is it's about the law of averages. There needs to be a big enough pool of that from which to draw upon. Only a small proportion of that pool will end up being world-class. But there needs to be the volume in the first place, at least statistically (and almost invariably in reality). Australia, thus far, has struggled to draw upon that volume. Countries such as Germany and Brazil can draw upon that volume. The whole point is that touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. Seeing as they are the hardest to master this should be taught as early as possible and given the greatest importance. Sure to a degree athleticism is important in football but it's more important in a game like AFL. The comparison to play AFL vs Football is non existent. There is no skill at all in AFL. I mean how hard is it to kick a ball 40-50m. I reckon you give me 1-2 hrs with the world's best footballers and they will be kicking goals from the pocket. How hard is it to fumble a Sherrin around. Even "good" AFL players can barely hold on it. It's laughable how ridiculous these supposed best players are. Absolute rubbish. I agree that inveighing against the AFL is justified and can be fun. But it doesn't actually get football in Australia anywhere. What football needs is to start making a big impact on the Australian sporting cultural landscape again. It did very well in 2005 and 2006 (and even before with Harry and Dukes playing so well in the Premier League). But since then things have been rather lacklustre. Touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. But they can be mastered. One huge challenge for Australian football is working out the best way for Australian footballers to master those things. But there's another problem. Those things, in and of themselves, usually aren't sufficient for producing world-class footballers in positions of striker, fantasista and wide players; i.e. touch and technical ability aren't enough for Australia's current problem positions. They're simply some of the crucial components. Crucial, nevertheless. But not the whole picture. World-class footballers in those areas tend to be very fast and agile and have outstanding co-ordination. Those areas can be improved in the individual with practice and knowledge, but they supreme ability there tends to be rather innate. And for that, Australian football needs access to the best Australian athletes there are. Unfortunately, the AFL has rather a profound influence in procuring those type of athletes.What needs to happen is they need to grow up playing football. Or else, Australia will not improve particularly much at football except by extreme fluke. Your comment doesn't hold true for NSW and to a lesser extent Qld. AFL has a niche market in NSW being the smallest of the 4 codes there and although it is trying to grow its penetration of the market only about 5% of AFL listed players come from NSW with about half of those historically from the small population in the Riverina. The number of registered football players in NSW/ACT is about 300k which is about twice what the AFL has in Victoria so in NSW we have a resource of talent to mine unequalled in the country for any code. In NSW the issue isn't other codes taking the cream of the crop of athletes but our code not having the funds to provide the opportunity to the young players coming through. I love how the AFL "sympathisers" for lack of a better word love to trudge out this same mantra ie that the best Athletes are naturally funneling into AFL. Simply not the case. The first problem is measuring this after all there is no benchmark for the AFL in any other country which to measure against. The closest we come to is Ireland and their semi-professional players beat AFL players on a regular basis. Is it skill or perhaps Athleticism that they are beating us on. Hard to measure. Perhaps the best Athletes aren't moving to AFL because the so called best Athlete's can't even beat semi-professional Irishmen. Considering football is also popular in Ireland perhaps the best Athletes are playing football in Ireland which would make those losses seem even worse. Our best and Athletic players in AFL can't beat the best of the rest Athletes in Ireland. The best who would be naturally funneling into football or perhaps hurling. What we are seeing more and more is that young players are playing football. There are hardly enough football fields for kids to play on while AFL fields are empty and this is in the state of Victoria. So if these are really the best Athletes in Australia playing AFL then it can only get worse before it gets better. This is the AFLs Zenith. Your Welcome The mickey mouse competition against Ireland (only partially based on what is already a mickey mouse sport; Aussie Rules) is probably not the best thing to go by. It is tricky to measure these sports against each other However, it's possible to see the sprint times of many AFL footballers. The results are rather telling. And if you can put up with the boring task of watching AFL, you can clearly see that certain Aussie Rules footballers have supreme levels of speed, agility, co-ordination and so on. I don't watch enough of it to be able to produce a comprehensive list. From what I've watched, Cyril Rioli, Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield and Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti have to reasonably count among the most gifted Australian athletes there are. Undoubtedly, there are similar cases in the NRL. I realise it's easy to hate the AFL. And it's fair enough to do so. But it doesn't really get us anywhere. Those people who are actively involved in working with footballers from all codes in Australia (namely sports physicians and physios) are probably the best judge of these things. I know a few. Their accounts support my worst suspicions. That may be anecdotal fallacy but meh. I care about seeing Australian football get better. If that requires asking tough questions, so be it. It's not just the state of Victoria. This is also a problem in SA and WA. Same with NT. I don't know Tassie but I've heard tell it's a problem there, too. The reason the AFL has access to la crème de la crème of athletes in theses places is because it does dominate the sporting landscape. What's particularly concerning is that there are quite a few instances of world-class sports people who went into other sports but had strong ties to Aussie Rules are realistically had decent prospects of playing AFL. A bunch of these basically had the option of choosing. Thankfully, they chose the other sport. Lleyton Hewitt, Patty Mills and Ben Simmons spring to mind. It begs the question, how many others could have done similarly brilliant things in other sports but ended up playing AFL? I dont understand the argument really. Football has lost no one. The point is that, as football does not have sufficient influence in the sporting cultural landscape in VIC/SA/WA/TAS/NT, it doesn't have access to a sufficiently large pool of very athletic young footballers. This is due, to a great extent, to the dominance of the AFL in that regard and not helped by media bias and Australian cultural tendencies. It's less of problem in NSW/QLD as, thankfully, AFL has little or no bearing there. Nevertheless, it still has to compete with rugby league (and to a lesser extent rugby union). They don't have quite the same stronghold of those states as AFL has in VIC/SA/WA/TAS/NT. But it's hardly ideal. +x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xAFL can take the athletes. After all it's all they have. I'll settle for the skillful sportspeople, I will go on for watching the very best athletes every four years, the AFL can have the leftovers from the olympics. With the utmost respect, this post suggests a misunderstanding of the concepts of skill, technique and athleticism. Relative to sports such as football, cricket and tennis, Aussie Rules does not set so much store by technique (or tactical awareness). But does that mean that the best AFL footballers aren't skillful? No. If anything, it compensates for this by putting additional focus on things such as skill and athleticism. That's why it's not unheard of for someone who has never played Aussie Rules to take it up as an adult and be able to play (with success) in the AFL. It relies on natural skills rather than the kind of technical ability and tactical awareness which are almost always only gained through hours and hours of practice from a fairly young age. In a nutshell, skill in AFL is based almost entirely on athletic ability. In football, it varies. In some parts of the park, skill is based almost entirely on technical ability and tactical awareness. In other parts of the park, it's based on a combination of technical ability, tactical awareness and athletic ability (particularly speed and agility). The thing is that heaps of the best footballers have it all. And the AFL does get a disproportionately large amount of the best athletes in Australia (or gets near them). Imagine if AFL footballers such as Cyril Rioli, Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield, Sam Mitchell and Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti had grown up in households where football was the most popular sport. Imagine if they had been brought up playing football from a young age and coached very well. These are some absolutely world-class athletes and (as AFL footballers go) have very good game awareness, it seems. I wager there's every chance Australia would have Brazilian, German and even Italian defences very worried. Imagine if Tom Rogic and Aaron Mooy could construct passages of play with those kind of footballers. Look at basketball. Patty Mills and Ben Simmonds are both in the NBA. Patty is a superbly gifted athlete and a world-class point guard while Ben Simmonds has the potential to be a once-in-a-generation talent. Both played elite junior Aussie Rules and Patty very nearly went to the AIS on a scholarship for it. Australian basketball has benefited immeasurably from those kind of guys (plus Matthew Dellavedova, Andrew Bogut and so on). Imagine if Australian football could draw upon some of these guys who are so athletic and have great match awareness. The concept is that the Socceroos does have some great athletes Leckie, Smith, Irvine & before them the likes of Cahill & Emerton, all superb athletes, the problem we have is that we don't produce enough touch players. So having all these wonderful AFL athletes in Football would matter little if they cannot master the 1st touch & technique of the Brazilians & very few Australians have been able to master it. Yep, agreed. But if they did master first touch and technique, then having all these wonderful AFL athletes in football would make Australia a world-class football nation, in all likelihood. The point is it's about the law of averages. There needs to be a big enough pool of that from which to draw upon. Only a small proportion of that pool will end up being world-class. But there needs to be the volume in the first place, at least statistically (and almost invariably in reality). Australia, thus far, has struggled to draw upon that volume. Countries such as Germany and Brazil can draw upon that volume. The whole point is that touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. Seeing as they are the hardest to master this should be taught as early as possible and given the greatest importance. Sure to a degree athleticism is important in football but it's more important in a game like AFL. The comparison to play AFL vs Football is non existent. There is no skill at all in AFL. I mean how hard is it to kick a ball 40-50m. I reckon you give me 1-2 hrs with the world's best footballers and they will be kicking goals from the pocket. How hard is it to fumble a Sherrin around. Even "good" AFL players can barely hold on it. It's laughable how ridiculous these supposed best players are. Absolute rubbish. I agree that inveighing against the AFL is justified and can be fun. But it doesn't actually get football in Australia anywhere. What football needs is to start making a big impact on the Australian sporting cultural landscape again. It did very well in 2005 and 2006 (and even before with Harry and Dukes playing so well in the Premier League). But since then things have been rather lacklustre. Touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. But they can be mastered. One huge challenge for Australian football is working out the best way for Australian footballers to master those things. But there's another problem. Those things, in and of themselves, usually aren't sufficient for producing world-class footballers in positions of striker, fantasista and wide players; i.e. touch and technical ability aren't enough for Australia's current problem positions. They're simply some of the crucial components. Crucial, nevertheless. But not the whole picture. World-class footballers in those areas tend to be very fast and agile and have outstanding co-ordination. Those areas can be improved in the individual with practice and knowledge, but they supreme ability there tends to be rather innate. And for that, Australian football needs access to the best Australian athletes there are. Unfortunately, the AFL has rather a profound influence in procuring those type of athletes.What needs to happen is they need to grow up playing football. Or else, Australia will not improve particularly much at football except by extreme fluke. Your comment doesn't hold true for NSW and to a lesser extent Qld. AFL has a niche market in NSW being the smallest of the 4 codes there and although it is trying to grow its penetration of the market only about 5% of AFL listed players come from NSW with about half of those historically from the small population in the Riverina. The number of registered football players in NSW/ACT is about 300k which is about twice what the AFL has in Victoria so in NSW we have a resource of talent to mine unequalled in the country for any code. In NSW the issue isn't other codes taking the cream of the crop of athletes but our code not having the funds to provide the opportunity to the young players coming through. I love how the AFL "sympathisers" for lack of a better word love to trudge out this same mantra ie that the best Athletes are naturally funneling into AFL. Simply not the case. The first problem is measuring this after all there is no benchmark for the AFL in any other country which to measure against. The closest we come to is Ireland and their semi-professional players beat AFL players on a regular basis. Is it skill or perhaps Athleticism that they are beating us on. Hard to measure. Perhaps the best Athletes aren't moving to AFL because the so called best Athlete's can't even beat semi-professional Irishmen. Considering football is also popular in Ireland perhaps the best Athletes are playing football in Ireland which would make those losses seem even worse. Our best and Athletic players in AFL can't beat the best of the rest Athletes in Ireland. The best who would be naturally funneling into football or perhaps hurling. What we are seeing more and more is that young players are playing football. There are hardly enough football fields for kids to play on while AFL fields are empty and this is in the state of Victoria. So if these are really the best Athletes in Australia playing AFL then it can only get worse before it gets better. This is the AFLs Zenith. Your Welcome The mickey mouse competition against Ireland (only partially based on what is already a mickey mouse sport; Aussie Rules) is probably not the best thing to go by. It is tricky to measure these sports against each other However, it's possible to see the sprint times of many AFL footballers. The results are rather telling. And if you can put up with the boring task of watching AFL, you can clearly see that certain Aussie Rules footballers have supreme levels of speed, agility, co-ordination and so on. I don't watch enough of it to be able to produce a comprehensive list. From what I've watched, Cyril Rioli, Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield and Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti have to reasonably count among the most gifted Australian athletes there are. Undoubtedly, there are similar cases in the NRL. I realise it's easy to hate the AFL. And it's fair enough to do so. But it doesn't really get us anywhere. Those people who are actively involved in working with footballers from all codes in Australia (namely sports physicians and physios) are probably the best judge of these things. I know a few. Their accounts support my worst suspicions. That may be anecdotal fallacy but meh. I care about seeing Australian football get better. If that requires asking tough questions, so be it. It's not just the state of Victoria. This is also a problem in SA and WA. Same with NT. I don't know Tassie but I've heard tell it's a problem there, too. The reason the AFL has access to la crème de la crème of athletes in theses places is because it does dominate the sporting landscape. What's particularly concerning is that there are quite a few instances of world-class sports people who went into other sports but had strong ties to Aussie Rules are realistically had decent prospects of playing AFL. A bunch of these basically had the option of choosing. Thankfully, they chose the other sport. Lleyton Hewitt, Patty Mills and Ben Simmons spring to mind. It begs the question, how many others could have done similarly brilliant things in other sports but ended up playing AFL? Are all the best Athletes only residing in Vic, WA, and SA where AFL is mainly played Of course not, thank goodness. But it's a fairly large chunk of the country, isn't it? +x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xAFL can take the athletes. After all it's all they have. I'll settle for the skillful sportspeople, I will go on for watching the very best athletes every four years, the AFL can have the leftovers from the olympics. With the utmost respect, this post suggests a misunderstanding of the concepts of skill, technique and athleticism. Relative to sports such as football, cricket and tennis, Aussie Rules does not set so much store by technique (or tactical awareness). But does that mean that the best AFL footballers aren't skillful? No. If anything, it compensates for this by putting additional focus on things such as skill and athleticism. That's why it's not unheard of for someone who has never played Aussie Rules to take it up as an adult and be able to play (with success) in the AFL. It relies on natural skills rather than the kind of technical ability and tactical awareness which are almost always only gained through hours and hours of practice from a fairly young age. In a nutshell, skill in AFL is based almost entirely on athletic ability. In football, it varies. In some parts of the park, skill is based almost entirely on technical ability and tactical awareness. In other parts of the park, it's based on a combination of technical ability, tactical awareness and athletic ability (particularly speed and agility). The thing is that heaps of the best footballers have it all. And the AFL does get a disproportionately large amount of the best athletes in Australia (or gets near them). Imagine if AFL footballers such as Cyril Rioli, Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield, Sam Mitchell and Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti had grown up in households where football was the most popular sport. Imagine if they had been brought up playing football from a young age and coached very well. These are some absolutely world-class athletes and (as AFL footballers go) have very good game awareness, it seems. I wager there's every chance Australia would have Brazilian, German and even Italian defences very worried. Imagine if Tom Rogic and Aaron Mooy could construct passages of play with those kind of footballers. Look at basketball. Patty Mills and Ben Simmonds are both in the NBA. Patty is a superbly gifted athlete and a world-class point guard while Ben Simmonds has the potential to be a once-in-a-generation talent. Both played elite junior Aussie Rules and Patty very nearly went to the AIS on a scholarship for it. Australian basketball has benefited immeasurably from those kind of guys (plus Matthew Dellavedova, Andrew Bogut and so on). Imagine if Australian football could draw upon some of these guys who are so athletic and have great match awareness. The concept is that the Socceroos does have some great athletes Leckie, Smith, Irvine & before them the likes of Cahill & Emerton, all superb athletes, the problem we have is that we don't produce enough touch players. So having all these wonderful AFL athletes in Football would matter little if they cannot master the 1st touch & technique of the Brazilians & very few Australians have been able to master it. Yep, agreed. But if they did master first touch and technique, then having all these wonderful AFL athletes in football would make Australia a world-class football nation, in all likelihood. The point is it's about the law of averages. There needs to be a big enough pool of that from which to draw upon. Only a small proportion of that pool will end up being world-class. But there needs to be the volume in the first place, at least statistically (and almost invariably in reality). Australia, thus far, has struggled to draw upon that volume. Countries such as Germany and Brazil can draw upon that volume. The whole point is that touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. Seeing as they are the hardest to master this should be taught as early as possible and given the greatest importance. Sure to a degree athleticism is important in football but it's more important in a game like AFL. The comparison to play AFL vs Football is non existent. There is no skill at all in AFL. I mean how hard is it to kick a ball 40-50m. I reckon you give me 1-2 hrs with the world's best footballers and they will be kicking goals from the pocket. How hard is it to fumble a Sherrin around. Even "good" AFL players can barely hold on it. It's laughable how ridiculous these supposed best players are. Absolute rubbish. I agree that inveighing against the AFL is justified and can be fun. But it doesn't actually get football in Australia anywhere. What football needs is to start making a big impact on the Australian sporting cultural landscape again. It did very well in 2005 and 2006 (and even before with Harry and Dukes playing so well in the Premier League). But since then things have been rather lacklustre. Touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. But they can be mastered. One huge challenge for Australian football is working out the best way for Australian footballers to master those things. But there's another problem. Those things, in and of themselves, usually aren't sufficient for producing world-class footballers in positions of striker, fantasista and wide players; i.e. touch and technical ability aren't enough for Australia's current problem positions. They're simply some of the crucial components. Crucial, nevertheless. But not the whole picture. World-class footballers in those areas tend to be very fast and agile and have outstanding co-ordination. Those areas can be improved in the individual with practice and knowledge, but they supreme ability there tends to be rather innate. And for that, Australian football needs access to the best Australian athletes there are. Unfortunately, the AFL has rather a profound influence in procuring those type of athletes.What needs to happen is they need to grow up playing football. Or else, Australia will not improve particularly much at football except by extreme fluke. Your comment doesn't hold true for NSW and to a lesser extent Qld. AFL has a niche market in NSW being the smallest of the 4 codes there and although it is trying to grow its penetration of the market only about 5% of AFL listed players come from NSW with about half of those historically from the small population in the Riverina. The number of registered football players in NSW/ACT is about 300k which is about twice what the AFL has in Victoria so in NSW we have a resource of talent to mine unequalled in the country for any code. In NSW the issue isn't other codes taking the cream of the crop of athletes but our code not having the funds to provide the opportunity to the young players coming through. I love how the AFL "sympathisers" for lack of a better word love to trudge out this same mantra ie that the best Athletes are naturally funneling into AFL. Simply not the case. The first problem is measuring this after all there is no benchmark for the AFL in any other country which to measure against. The closest we come to is Ireland and their semi-professional players beat AFL players on a regular basis. Is it skill or perhaps Athleticism that they are beating us on. Hard to measure. Perhaps the best Athletes aren't moving to AFL because the so called best Athlete's can't even beat semi-professional Irishmen. Considering football is also popular in Ireland perhaps the best Athletes are playing football in Ireland which would make those losses seem even worse. Our best and Athletic players in AFL can't beat the best of the rest Athletes in Ireland. The best who would be naturally funneling into football or perhaps hurling. What we are seeing more and more is that young players are playing football. There are hardly enough football fields for kids to play on while AFL fields are empty and this is in the state of Victoria. So if these are really the best Athletes in Australia playing AFL then it can only get worse before it gets better. This is the AFLs Zenith. Your Welcome The mickey mouse competition against Ireland (only partially based on what is already a mickey mouse sport; Aussie Rules) is probably not the best thing to go by. It is tricky to measure these sports against each other However, it's possible to see the sprint times of many AFL footballers. The results are rather telling. And if you can put up with the boring task of watching AFL, you can clearly see that certain Aussie Rules footballers have supreme levels of speed, agility, co-ordination and so on. I don't watch enough of it to be able to produce a comprehensive list. From what I've watched, Cyril Rioli, Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield and Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti have to reasonably count among the most gifted Australian athletes there are. Undoubtedly, there are similar cases in the NRL. I realise it's easy to hate the AFL. And it's fair enough to do so. But it doesn't really get us anywhere. Those people who are actively involved in working with footballers from all codes in Australia (namely sports physicians and physios) are probably the best judge of these things. I know a few. Their accounts support my worst suspicions. That may be anecdotal fallacy but meh. I care about seeing Australian football get better. If that requires asking tough questions, so be it. It's not just the state of Victoria. This is also a problem in SA and WA. Same with NT. I don't know Tassie but I've heard tell it's a problem there, too. The reason the AFL has access to la crème de la crème of athletes in theses places is because it does dominate the sporting landscape. What's particularly concerning is that there are quite a few instances of world-class sports people who went into other sports but had strong ties to Aussie Rules are realistically had decent prospects of playing AFL. A bunch of these basically had the option of choosing. Thankfully, they chose the other sport. Lleyton Hewitt, Patty Mills and Ben Simmons spring to mind. It begs the question, how many others could have done similarly brilliant things in other sports but ended up playing AFL? If they were going to be footballers they would have had to have made the decision to stop playing football at a young age. You wouldn't have even have developed properly to even know if you would have been a supreme Athlete. You can make all the what if's you like but unless a player is playing football his whole life he will never become an elite player in football. A player like Cyril Rioli for example who is a good Athlete would probably be a decent footballer if he started out as a 6-10 year old and continued it all through his formative years. I have no idea what his football skills are like and there would have been no idea what an Athlete he would have been when he grew older.
Sorry but you misunderstand this point. The point is not that Cyril Rioli would have become a world-class footballer if he had grown up playing football and been coached properly. The point is that chances are he'd have been a very good candidate and when you have many children with similar athletic ability brought up playing football and coached properly, all of a sudden you have a significantly better chance of developing world-class footballers.
Football mightn't have lost these athletes. But it never had them in the first place. In other countries, these athletes would have grown up in football households.
Some would say that's as good as losing them. It's because football hasn't the impact it needs to have in VIC/SA/WA/TAS/NT.
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x[quote]AFL can take the athletes. After all it's all they have. I'll settle for the skillful sportspeople, I will go on for watching the very best athletes every four years, the AFL can have the leftovers from the olympics. With the utmost respect, this post suggests a misunderstanding of the concepts of skill, technique and athleticism. Relative to sports such as football, cricket and tennis, Aussie Rules does not set so much store by technique (or tactical awareness). But does that mean that the best AFL footballers aren't skillful? No. If anything, it compensates for this by putting additional focus on things such as skill and athleticism. That's why it's not unheard of for someone who has never played Aussie Rules to take it up as an adult and be able to play (with success) in the AFL. It relies on natural skills rather than the kind of technical ability and tactical awareness which are almost always only gained through hours and hours of practice from a fairly young age. In a nutshell, skill in AFL is based almost entirely on athletic ability. In football, it varies. In some parts of the park, skill is based almost entirely on technical ability and tactical awareness. In other parts of the park, it's based on a combination of technical ability, tactical awareness and athletic ability (particularly speed and agility). The thing is that heaps of the best footballers have it all. And the AFL does get a disproportionately large amount of the best athletes in Australia (or gets near them). Imagine if AFL footballers such as Cyril Rioli, Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield, Sam Mitchell and Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti had grown up in households where football was the most popular sport. Imagine if they had been brought up playing football from a young age and coached very well. These are some absolutely world-class athletes and (as AFL footballers go) have very good game awareness, it seems. I wager there's every chance Australia would have Brazilian, German and even Italian defences very worried. Imagine if Tom Rogic and Aaron Mooy could construct passages of play with those kind of footballers. Look at basketball. Patty Mills and Ben Simmonds are both in the NBA. Patty is a superbly gifted athlete and a world-class point guard while Ben Simmonds has the potential to be a once-in-a-generation talent. Both played elite junior Aussie Rules and Patty very nearly went to the AIS on a scholarship for it. Australian basketball has benefited immeasurably from those kind of guys (plus Matthew Dellavedova, Andrew Bogut and so on). Imagine if Australian football could draw upon some of these guys who are so athletic and have great match awareness. The concept is that the Socceroos does have some great athletes Leckie, Smith, Irvine & before them the likes of Cahill & Emerton, all superb athletes, the problem we have is that we don't produce enough touch players. So having all these wonderful AFL athletes in Football would matter little if they cannot master the 1st touch & technique of the Brazilians & very few Australians have been able to master it. Yep, agreed. But if they did master first touch and technique, then having all these wonderful AFL athletes in football would make Australia a world-class football nation, in all likelihood. The point is it's about the law of averages. There needs to be a big enough pool of that from which to draw upon. Only a small proportion of that pool will end up being world-class. But there needs to be the volume in the first place, at least statistically (and almost invariably in reality). Australia, thus far, has struggled to draw upon that volume. Countries such as Germany and Brazil can draw upon that volume. The whole point is that touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. Seeing as they are the hardest to master this should be taught as early as possible and given the greatest importance. Sure to a degree athleticism is important in football but it's more important in a game like AFL. The comparison to play AFL vs Football is non existent. There is no skill at all in AFL. I mean how hard is it to kick a ball 40-50m. I reckon you give me 1-2 hrs with the world's best footballers and they will be kicking goals from the pocket. How hard is it to fumble a Sherrin around. Even "good" AFL players can barely hold on it. It's laughable how ridiculous these supposed best players are. Absolute rubbish. I agree that inveighing against the AFL is justified and can be fun. But it doesn't actually get football in Australia anywhere. What football needs is to start making a big impact on the Australian sporting cultural landscape again. It did very well in 2005 and 2006 (and even before with Harry and Dukes playing so well in the Premier League). But since then things have been rather lacklustre. Touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. But they can be mastered. One huge challenge for Australian football is working out the best way for Australian footballers to master those things. But there's another problem. Those things, in and of themselves, usually aren't sufficient for producing world-class footballers in positions of striker, fantasista and wide players; i.e. touch and technical ability aren't enough for Australia's current problem positions. They're simply some of the crucial components. Crucial, nevertheless. But not the whole picture. World-class footballers in those areas tend to be very fast and agile and have outstanding co-ordination. Those areas can be improved in the individual with practice and knowledge, but they supreme ability there tends to be rather innate. And for that, Australian football needs access to the best Australian athletes there are. Unfortunately, the AFL has rather a profound influence in procuring those type of athletes.What needs to happen is they need to grow up playing football. Or else, Australia will not improve particularly much at football except by extreme fluke. Your comment doesn't hold true for NSW and to a lesser extent Qld. AFL has a niche market in NSW being the smallest of the 4 codes there and although it is trying to grow its penetration of the market only about 5% of AFL listed players come from NSW with about half of those historically from the small population in the Riverina. The number of registered football players in NSW/ACT is about 300k which is about twice what the AFL has in Victoria so in NSW we have a resource of talent to mine unequalled in the country for any code. In NSW the issue isn't other codes taking the cream of the crop of athletes but our code not having the funds to provide the opportunity to the young players coming through. I love how the AFL "sympathisers" for lack of a better word love to trudge out this same mantra ie that the best Athletes are naturally funneling into AFL. Simply not the case. The first problem is measuring this after all there is no benchmark for the AFL in any other country which to measure against. The closest we come to is Ireland and their semi-professional players beat AFL players on a regular basis. Is it skill or perhaps Athleticism that they are beating us on. Hard to measure. Perhaps the best Athletes aren't moving to AFL because the so called best Athlete's can't even beat semi-professional Irishmen. Considering football is also popular in Ireland perhaps the best Athletes are playing football in Ireland which would make those losses seem even worse. Our best and Athletic players in AFL can't beat the best of the rest Athletes in Ireland. The best who would be naturally funneling into football or perhaps hurling. What we are seeing more and more is that young players are playing football. There are hardly enough football fields for kids to play on while AFL fields are empty and this is in the state of Victoria. So if these are really the best Athletes in Australia playing AFL then it can only get worse before it gets better. This is the AFLs Zenith. Your Welcome The mickey mouse competition against Ireland (only partially based on what is already a mickey mouse sport; Aussie Rules) is probably not the best thing to go by. It is tricky to measure these sports against each other However, it's possible to see the sprint times of many AFL footballers. The results are rather telling. And if you can put up with the boring task of watching AFL, you can clearly see that certain Aussie Rules footballers have supreme levels of speed, agility, co-ordination and so on. I don't watch enough of it to be able to produce a comprehensive list. From what I've watched, Cyril Rioli, Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield and Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti have to reasonably count among the most gifted Australian athletes there are. Undoubtedly, there are similar cases in the NRL. I realise it's easy to hate the AFL. And it's fair enough to do so. But it doesn't really get us anywhere. Those people who are actively involved in working with footballers from all codes in Australia (namely sports physicians and physios) are probably the best judge of these things. I know a few. Their accounts support my worst suspicions. That may be anecdotal fallacy but meh. I care about seeing Australian football get better. If that requires asking tough questions, so be it. It's not just the state of Victoria. This is also a problem in SA and WA. Same with NT. I don't know Tassie but I've heard tell it's a problem there, too. The reason the AFL has access to la crème de la crème of athletes in theses places is because it does dominate the sporting landscape. What's particularly concerning is that there are quite a few instances of world-class sports people who went into other sports but had strong ties to Aussie Rules are realistically had decent prospects of playing AFL. A bunch of these basically had the option of choosing. Thankfully, they chose the other sport. Lleyton Hewitt, Patty Mills and Ben Simmons spring to mind. It begs the question, how many others could have done similarly brilliant things in other sports but ended up playing AFL? There are some supreme Athletes worldwide in football, probably more so than the best AFL can muster. That's my point. Most of Europe, Africa and Asia can hope that the best athletes will grow up playing football. Australia hasn't had this luxury. The majority of the best athletes in in most parts of Australia tend to grow up in AFL households.
|
|
|
|
|
City Sam
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x@ quickflick "Australian football needs access to the best Australian athletes there are" ... no it doesn't, it absoloutly doesn't. It just needs access to people wanting to play their game. The "best atheletes" don't factor into any of their needs It needs both. The former will be the consequence of the latter. Tell me, how many of Cristiano Ronaldo, Leo Messi, Arjen Robben, Gareth Bale, Thierry Henry and so on are not (or were not) world-class athletes? The fact of the matter is it's very unusual for a world-class footballer who plays in the role of striker, fantasista, winger, wingback, fullback or goalkeeper not to be a world-class athlete. That accounts for most of the park. Legitimately every single athlete across every single sport on the planet is a good athlete. Athletes are created by vigorous training, balance will improve, hand eye coordination, fitness, strength and even the ability to accelerate faster can be improved by training and countless more aspects to it are all abilities the individual improved upon in the journey. Ronaldo is the perfect example, do you think he sat on his arse all day and was allowed to do so because of his genetics and still be an absolutely incredible athlete? The answer is no, he trained to such a state to improve and maintain himself at such a masterful athletic ability. Imo, that's not nuanced enough. There's a distinction that needs to be drawn between footballers such as Cristiano Ronaldo and Paul Scholes. Both have played world-class football. But one is a world-class athlete in terms of speed, agility and so on. The other did so brilliantly while not being particularly athletic. Central midfield being more congested it places more weight on football IQ (which Cristiano Ronaldo also has in spades, to be clear). Of course Cristiano Ronaldo has done a hell of a lot work to hone his athletic abilities. But he's still innately quicker and more athletic than most people. There are thousands of footballers alone who are quicker than Ronaldo and athletically superior, the difference is a large portion of them are hacks at the sport. Ronaldo when he came on the scene was this skinny, weak little kid with some pace and superb football technique. He trained and soon became not only quicker but strong and even more technically gifted. Point is Ronaldo made himself the incredible athlete he is today as have the rest of them but what separates them all is footballing ability. Sam, sorry but I disagree with the gist of this (although parts of it are correct, imo). Cristiano Ronaldo is still in the same ballpark as the majority of those footballers who are athletically superior. Whereas, ostensibly, other footballers cannot go through the gears as quickly as he can, he's in the upper echelon of fast and agile footballers. Then there are footballers who are just as athletic (or more) but lack the skill, technical ability, football IQ and mental strength, etc. Those are faster/more agile but not as good at football. As he's still very athletic, they don't have such a big athletic advantage for it to make them superior. The point is that, for specific positions, world-class footballers have the football ability and football smarts (gained through years of training and great coaching) and the athletic ability (which, although it can be improved and requires lots of work, is largely innate). As I say, how many of Cristiano Ronaldo, Leo Messi, Gareth Bale, Arjen Robben, Neymar, Philippe Coutinho, Willian, Eden Hazard, Jordi Alba, Dani Alves, Thierry Henry, Michael Owen, etc. are not (or were not) exceedingly fast and agile? The average person can't realistically hope to match their levels of speed/agility through any amount of training. Ronaldo was not a special athlete when he came on the scene, he made himself a great athlete. Messi isn't even that fast but his ridiculous technical ability allows him to accelerate faster with the ball all gathered by training. Bale is a great athlete which like Ronaldo moulded himself to the player he is now, Robben likewise is quick as are i'd say about a few hundred thousand Australian footballers at any age but technical ability made him what he is. Neymar same as above, Coutinho isn't even quick nor strong but has supreme technical ability allows him to move freely and quicker than most. The point you are missing is every single person who plays sport on this planet is a great athlete and none were born that way, some may have advantages but every single one of them had to train their way to be efficient from a young age. And for footballers the key athletic ability for all these positions you say athleticism is necessary is balance and balance is trained and aspects like acceleration and speed you run with the ball at your feet is improved with it.
|
|
|
|
|
Waz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 19K,
Visits: 0
|
Australia has a large talent pool to draw from.
We are producing enough atheletes at aged 16/17 but then we have ONE academy in Canberra to take these atheletes and finish their technical development. That's one of the main reasons we are not getting the quantity of young kids we need - we only have one academy.
We have a talent pool equivalent to places like Belgium, Holland, Portugal and no one expects them to settle for less. We just need better youth development from 16-21 and that includes academies at all A League clubs, a viable youth competition, HAL expansion asap and a national second division .... it does not include more FFA trinket trips to youth tournaments around Asia etc
|
|
|
|
|
RBBAnonymous
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x@citysam thankyou that is basically the gist of what I was trying to say in my previous post. I should've taken the time to explain my reasoning. Even though football skills and smarts is 'built'. It is built through a lifetime of practice in where by it becomes second nature or 'natural'.Athleticism and genetics in most cases won't come into play until teens/early adulthood when a humans growth is at its peak. I'll admit genetics will limit ones athleticism to an extent but with proper training and coaching, especially if we are talking the elite level, it won't take long for someone to get faster and stronger, 'built' into an athlete. I don't really think this is true, sorry. Some people will never really have much chance of becoming athletic; i.e. fast and agile. They will never be able to run 100m in less than, say, 12 seconds. They'll never be able to accelerate out of traffic very quickly. Or to turn on a penny. It doesn't mean they can't become quicker, more agile, more flexible, or develop very good aerobic fitness levels, or gain excellent core strength. They can learn to hold their own in football. In very technical things, such as swimming they can improve a lot and learn to swim faster than most people or through years of training become a black belt in various martial arts. The ordinary person can do these things. But elite levels of athletic ability are basically innate. And, it's overwhelmingly the case that footballers up front, out wide, and as goalkeepers have these elite levels of athletic ability. I'm not downplaying the importance of true football skills which are only gained through years of practice. I'm saying that countries which have access to footballers who have those skills who are also world-class athletes have a massive advantage. No one is downplaying Athleticism but the most important aspect is touch, technique and skill. A team full of skilled technicians who may not be the best Athletes will always beat a team of Athletes who have no skills. Eg A Liverpool over 45 team will beat a team of Athletic AFL players in a game of football. I know that is an extreme example but the basic premise holds true. Of course. But that misses the point. The point is that elite levels of athleticism are virtually requisite for world-class ability in most (but not all) positions in football. Very rarely are there world-class footballers in those positions who do not have such levels of athletic ability and touch, technique and skill. They almost always need it all. The fact that Australia has access to such a relatively small pool of footballers who have that athletic ability in the first place is part of the reason we struggle to produce world-class footballers. You need a large pool of footballers who have it all because the law of averages suggests that only a small proportion will make it. We don't have that pool. This is precisely why we end up with a bunch of footballers in positions which require both athleticism and football ability who lack one or the other. Hence all the problem positions for the NT now. No I totally disagree. We are lacking because of technical and skill deficiencies. There are plenty of countries around the world with much smaller talent pools than ours who produce a better footballer. Its all down to technical ability.
|
|
|
|
|
RBBAnonymous
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xAFL can take the athletes. After all it's all they have. I'll settle for the skillful sportspeople, I will go on for watching the very best athletes every four years, the AFL can have the leftovers from the olympics. With the utmost respect, this post suggests a misunderstanding of the concepts of skill, technique and athleticism. Relative to sports such as football, cricket and tennis, Aussie Rules does not set so much store by technique (or tactical awareness). But does that mean that the best AFL footballers aren't skillful? No. If anything, it compensates for this by putting additional focus on things such as skill and athleticism. That's why it's not unheard of for someone who has never played Aussie Rules to take it up as an adult and be able to play (with success) in the AFL. It relies on natural skills rather than the kind of technical ability and tactical awareness which are almost always only gained through hours and hours of practice from a fairly young age. In a nutshell, skill in AFL is based almost entirely on athletic ability. In football, it varies. In some parts of the park, skill is based almost entirely on technical ability and tactical awareness. In other parts of the park, it's based on a combination of technical ability, tactical awareness and athletic ability (particularly speed and agility). The thing is that heaps of the best footballers have it all. And the AFL does get a disproportionately large amount of the best athletes in Australia (or gets near them). Imagine if AFL footballers such as Cyril Rioli, Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield, Sam Mitchell and Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti had grown up in households where football was the most popular sport. Imagine if they had been brought up playing football from a young age and coached very well. These are some absolutely world-class athletes and (as AFL footballers go) have very good game awareness, it seems. I wager there's every chance Australia would have Brazilian, German and even Italian defences very worried. Imagine if Tom Rogic and Aaron Mooy could construct passages of play with those kind of footballers. Look at basketball. Patty Mills and Ben Simmonds are both in the NBA. Patty is a superbly gifted athlete and a world-class point guard while Ben Simmonds has the potential to be a once-in-a-generation talent. Both played elite junior Aussie Rules and Patty very nearly went to the AIS on a scholarship for it. Australian basketball has benefited immeasurably from those kind of guys (plus Matthew Dellavedova, Andrew Bogut and so on). Imagine if Australian football could draw upon some of these guys who are so athletic and have great match awareness. The concept is that the Socceroos does have some great athletes Leckie, Smith, Irvine & before them the likes of Cahill & Emerton, all superb athletes, the problem we have is that we don't produce enough touch players. So having all these wonderful AFL athletes in Football would matter little if they cannot master the 1st touch & technique of the Brazilians & very few Australians have been able to master it. Yep, agreed. But if they did master first touch and technique, then having all these wonderful AFL athletes in football would make Australia a world-class football nation, in all likelihood. The point is it's about the law of averages. There needs to be a big enough pool of that from which to draw upon. Only a small proportion of that pool will end up being world-class. But there needs to be the volume in the first place, at least statistically (and almost invariably in reality). Australia, thus far, has struggled to draw upon that volume. Countries such as Germany and Brazil can draw upon that volume. The whole point is that touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. Seeing as they are the hardest to master this should be taught as early as possible and given the greatest importance. Sure to a degree athleticism is important in football but it's more important in a game like AFL. The comparison to play AFL vs Football is non existent. There is no skill at all in AFL. I mean how hard is it to kick a ball 40-50m. I reckon you give me 1-2 hrs with the world's best footballers and they will be kicking goals from the pocket. How hard is it to fumble a Sherrin around. Even "good" AFL players can barely hold on it. It's laughable how ridiculous these supposed best players are. Absolute rubbish. I agree that inveighing against the AFL is justified and can be fun. But it doesn't actually get football in Australia anywhere. What football needs is to start making a big impact on the Australian sporting cultural landscape again. It did very well in 2005 and 2006 (and even before with Harry and Dukes playing so well in the Premier League). But since then things have been rather lacklustre. Touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. But they can be mastered. One huge challenge for Australian football is working out the best way for Australian footballers to master those things. But there's another problem. Those things, in and of themselves, usually aren't sufficient for producing world-class footballers in positions of striker, fantasista and wide players; i.e. touch and technical ability aren't enough for Australia's current problem positions. They're simply some of the crucial components. Crucial, nevertheless. But not the whole picture. World-class footballers in those areas tend to be very fast and agile and have outstanding co-ordination. Those areas can be improved in the individual with practice and knowledge, but they supreme ability there tends to be rather innate. And for that, Australian football needs access to the best Australian athletes there are. Unfortunately, the AFL has rather a profound influence in procuring those type of athletes.What needs to happen is they need to grow up playing football. Or else, Australia will not improve particularly much at football except by extreme fluke. Your comment doesn't hold true for NSW and to a lesser extent Qld. AFL has a niche market in NSW being the smallest of the 4 codes there and although it is trying to grow its penetration of the market only about 5% of AFL listed players come from NSW with about half of those historically from the small population in the Riverina. The number of registered football players in NSW/ACT is about 300k which is about twice what the AFL has in Victoria so in NSW we have a resource of talent to mine unequalled in the country for any code. In NSW the issue isn't other codes taking the cream of the crop of athletes but our code not having the funds to provide the opportunity to the young players coming through. I love how the AFL "sympathisers" for lack of a better word love to trudge out this same mantra ie that the best Athletes are naturally funneling into AFL. Simply not the case. The first problem is measuring this after all there is no benchmark for the AFL in any other country which to measure against. The closest we come to is Ireland and their semi-professional players beat AFL players on a regular basis. Is it skill or perhaps Athleticism that they are beating us on. Hard to measure. Perhaps the best Athletes aren't moving to AFL because the so called best Athlete's can't even beat semi-professional Irishmen. Considering football is also popular in Ireland perhaps the best Athletes are playing football in Ireland which would make those losses seem even worse. Our best and Athletic players in AFL can't beat the best of the rest Athletes in Ireland. The best who would be naturally funneling into football or perhaps hurling. What we are seeing more and more is that young players are playing football. There are hardly enough football fields for kids to play on while AFL fields are empty and this is in the state of Victoria. So if these are really the best Athletes in Australia playing AFL then it can only get worse before it gets better. This is the AFLs Zenith. Your Welcome The mickey mouse competition against Ireland (only partially based on what is already a mickey mouse sport; Aussie Rules) is probably not the best thing to go by. It is tricky to measure these sports against each other However, it's possible to see the sprint times of many AFL footballers. The results are rather telling. And if you can put up with the boring task of watching AFL, you can clearly see that certain Aussie Rules footballers have supreme levels of speed, agility, co-ordination and so on. I don't watch enough of it to be able to produce a comprehensive list. From what I've watched, Cyril Rioli, Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield and Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti have to reasonably count among the most gifted Australian athletes there are. Undoubtedly, there are similar cases in the NRL. I realise it's easy to hate the AFL. And it's fair enough to do so. But it doesn't really get us anywhere. Those people who are actively involved in working with footballers from all codes in Australia (namely sports physicians and physios) are probably the best judge of these things. I know a few. Their accounts support my worst suspicions. That may be anecdotal fallacy but meh. I care about seeing Australian football get better. If that requires asking tough questions, so be it. It's not just the state of Victoria. This is also a problem in SA and WA. Same with NT. I don't know Tassie but I've heard tell it's a problem there, too. The reason the AFL has access to la crème de la crème of athletes in theses places is because it does dominate the sporting landscape. What's particularly concerning is that there are quite a few instances of world-class sports people who went into other sports but had strong ties to Aussie Rules are realistically had decent prospects of playing AFL. A bunch of these basically had the option of choosing. Thankfully, they chose the other sport. Lleyton Hewitt, Patty Mills and Ben Simmons spring to mind. It begs the question, how many others could have done similarly brilliant things in other sports but ended up playing AFL? If they were going to be footballers they would have had to have made the decision to stop playing football at a young age. You wouldn't have even have developed properly to even know if you would have been a supreme Athlete. You can make all the what if's you like but unless a player is playing football his whole life he will never become an elite player in football. A player like Cyril Rioli for example who is a good Athlete would probably be a decent footballer if he started out as a 6-10 year old and continued it all through his formative years. I have no idea what his football skills are like and there would have been no idea what an Athlete he would have been when he grew older. The problem also is when we compare our footballers to the rest of the world we actually have a good benchmark to look at. There are some supreme Athletes worldwide in football, probably more so than the best AFL can muster. Are the AFL missing out on a better league by not recruiting from the world wide pool of Athletes, probably. Are all the best Athletes only residing in Vic, WA, and SA where AFL is mainly played, I could argue that as well. In NSW and QLD it is mainly NRL and football so I dont understand the argument really. Football has lost no one.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x@citysam thankyou that is basically the gist of what I was trying to say in my previous post. I should've taken the time to explain my reasoning. Even though football skills and smarts is 'built'. It is built through a lifetime of practice in where by it becomes second nature or 'natural'.Athleticism and genetics in most cases won't come into play until teens/early adulthood when a humans growth is at its peak. I'll admit genetics will limit ones athleticism to an extent but with proper training and coaching, especially if we are talking the elite level, it won't take long for someone to get faster and stronger, 'built' into an athlete. I don't really think this is true, sorry. Some people will never really have much chance of becoming athletic; i.e. fast and agile. They will never be able to run 100m in less than, say, 12 seconds. They'll never be able to accelerate out of traffic very quickly. Or to turn on a penny. It doesn't mean they can't become quicker, more agile, more flexible, or develop very good aerobic fitness levels, or gain excellent core strength. They can learn to hold their own in football. In very technical things, such as swimming they can improve a lot and learn to swim faster than most people or through years of training become a black belt in various martial arts. The ordinary person can do these things. But elite levels of athletic ability are basically innate. And, it's overwhelmingly the case that footballers up front, out wide, and as goalkeepers have these elite levels of athletic ability. I'm not downplaying the importance of true football skills which are only gained through years of practice. I'm saying that countries which have access to footballers who have those skills who are also world-class athletes have a massive advantage. No one is downplaying Athleticism but the most important aspect is touch, technique and skill. A team full of skilled technicians who may not be the best Athletes will always beat a team of Athletes who have no skills. Eg A Liverpool over 45 team will beat a team of Athletic AFL players in a game of football. I know that is an extreme example but the basic premise holds true. Of course. But that misses the point. The point is that elite levels of athleticism are virtually requisite for world-class ability in most (but not all) positions in football. Very rarely are there world-class footballers in those positions who do not have such levels of athletic ability and touch, technique and skill. They almost always need it all. The fact that Australia has access to such a relatively small pool of footballers who have that athletic ability in the first place is part of the reason we struggle to produce world-class footballers. You need a large pool of footballers who have it all because the law of averages suggests that only a small proportion will make it. We don't have that pool. This is precisely why we end up with a bunch of footballers in positions which require both athleticism and football ability who lack one or the other. Hence all the problem positions for the NT now.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xAFL can take the athletes. After all it's all they have. I'll settle for the skillful sportspeople, I will go on for watching the very best athletes every four years, the AFL can have the leftovers from the olympics. With the utmost respect, this post suggests a misunderstanding of the concepts of skill, technique and athleticism. Relative to sports such as football, cricket and tennis, Aussie Rules does not set so much store by technique (or tactical awareness). But does that mean that the best AFL footballers aren't skillful? No. If anything, it compensates for this by putting additional focus on things such as skill and athleticism. That's why it's not unheard of for someone who has never played Aussie Rules to take it up as an adult and be able to play (with success) in the AFL. It relies on natural skills rather than the kind of technical ability and tactical awareness which are almost always only gained through hours and hours of practice from a fairly young age. In a nutshell, skill in AFL is based almost entirely on athletic ability. In football, it varies. In some parts of the park, skill is based almost entirely on technical ability and tactical awareness. In other parts of the park, it's based on a combination of technical ability, tactical awareness and athletic ability (particularly speed and agility). The thing is that heaps of the best footballers have it all. And the AFL does get a disproportionately large amount of the best athletes in Australia (or gets near them). Imagine if AFL footballers such as Cyril Rioli, Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield, Sam Mitchell and Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti had grown up in households where football was the most popular sport. Imagine if they had been brought up playing football from a young age and coached very well. These are some absolutely world-class athletes and (as AFL footballers go) have very good game awareness, it seems. I wager there's every chance Australia would have Brazilian, German and even Italian defences very worried. Imagine if Tom Rogic and Aaron Mooy could construct passages of play with those kind of footballers. Look at basketball. Patty Mills and Ben Simmonds are both in the NBA. Patty is a superbly gifted athlete and a world-class point guard while Ben Simmonds has the potential to be a once-in-a-generation talent. Both played elite junior Aussie Rules and Patty very nearly went to the AIS on a scholarship for it. Australian basketball has benefited immeasurably from those kind of guys (plus Matthew Dellavedova, Andrew Bogut and so on). Imagine if Australian football could draw upon some of these guys who are so athletic and have great match awareness. The concept is that the Socceroos does have some great athletes Leckie, Smith, Irvine & before them the likes of Cahill & Emerton, all superb athletes, the problem we have is that we don't produce enough touch players. So having all these wonderful AFL athletes in Football would matter little if they cannot master the 1st touch & technique of the Brazilians & very few Australians have been able to master it. Yep, agreed. But if they did master first touch and technique, then having all these wonderful AFL athletes in football would make Australia a world-class football nation, in all likelihood. The point is it's about the law of averages. There needs to be a big enough pool of that from which to draw upon. Only a small proportion of that pool will end up being world-class. But there needs to be the volume in the first place, at least statistically (and almost invariably in reality). Australia, thus far, has struggled to draw upon that volume. Countries such as Germany and Brazil can draw upon that volume. The whole point is that touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. Seeing as they are the hardest to master this should be taught as early as possible and given the greatest importance. Sure to a degree athleticism is important in football but it's more important in a game like AFL. The comparison to play AFL vs Football is non existent. There is no skill at all in AFL. I mean how hard is it to kick a ball 40-50m. I reckon you give me 1-2 hrs with the world's best footballers and they will be kicking goals from the pocket. How hard is it to fumble a Sherrin around. Even "good" AFL players can barely hold on it. It's laughable how ridiculous these supposed best players are. Absolute rubbish. I agree that inveighing against the AFL is justified and can be fun. But it doesn't actually get football in Australia anywhere. What football needs is to start making a big impact on the Australian sporting cultural landscape again. It did very well in 2005 and 2006 (and even before with Harry and Dukes playing so well in the Premier League). But since then things have been rather lacklustre. Touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. But they can be mastered. One huge challenge for Australian football is working out the best way for Australian footballers to master those things. But there's another problem. Those things, in and of themselves, usually aren't sufficient for producing world-class footballers in positions of striker, fantasista and wide players; i.e. touch and technical ability aren't enough for Australia's current problem positions. They're simply some of the crucial components. Crucial, nevertheless. But not the whole picture. World-class footballers in those areas tend to be very fast and agile and have outstanding co-ordination. Those areas can be improved in the individual with practice and knowledge, but they supreme ability there tends to be rather innate. And for that, Australian football needs access to the best Australian athletes there are. Unfortunately, the AFL has rather a profound influence in procuring those type of athletes.What needs to happen is they need to grow up playing football. Or else, Australia will not improve particularly much at football except by extreme fluke. Your comment doesn't hold true for NSW and to a lesser extent Qld. AFL has a niche market in NSW being the smallest of the 4 codes there and although it is trying to grow its penetration of the market only about 5% of AFL listed players come from NSW with about half of those historically from the small population in the Riverina. The number of registered football players in NSW/ACT is about 300k which is about twice what the AFL has in Victoria so in NSW we have a resource of talent to mine unequalled in the country for any code. In NSW the issue isn't other codes taking the cream of the crop of athletes but our code not having the funds to provide the opportunity to the young players coming through. I love how the AFL "sympathisers" for lack of a better word love to trudge out this same mantra ie that the best Athletes are naturally funneling into AFL. Simply not the case. The first problem is measuring this after all there is no benchmark for the AFL in any other country which to measure against. The closest we come to is Ireland and their semi-professional players beat AFL players on a regular basis. Is it skill or perhaps Athleticism that they are beating us on. Hard to measure. Perhaps the best Athletes aren't moving to AFL because the so called best Athlete's can't even beat semi-professional Irishmen. Considering football is also popular in Ireland perhaps the best Athletes are playing football in Ireland which would make those losses seem even worse. Our best and Athletic players in AFL can't beat the best of the rest Athletes in Ireland. The best who would be naturally funneling into football or perhaps hurling. What we are seeing more and more is that young players are playing football. There are hardly enough football fields for kids to play on while AFL fields are empty and this is in the state of Victoria. So if these are really the best Athletes in Australia playing AFL then it can only get worse before it gets better. This is the AFLs Zenith. Your Welcome The mickey mouse competition against Ireland (only partially based on what is already a mickey mouse sport; Aussie Rules) is probably not the best thing to go by. It is tricky to measure these sports against each other However, it's possible to see the sprint times of many AFL footballers. The results are rather telling. And if you can put up with the boring task of watching AFL, you can clearly see that certain Aussie Rules footballers have supreme levels of speed, agility, co-ordination and so on. I don't watch enough of it to be able to produce a comprehensive list. From what I've watched, Cyril Rioli, Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield and Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti have to reasonably count among the most gifted Australian athletes there are. Undoubtedly, there are similar cases in the NRL. I realise it's easy to hate the AFL. And it's fair enough to do so. But it doesn't really get us anywhere. Those people who are actively involved in working with footballers from all codes in Australia (namely sports physicians and physios) are probably the best judge of these things. I know a few. Their accounts support my worst suspicions. That may be anecdotal fallacy but meh. I care about seeing Australian football get better. If that requires asking tough questions, so be it. It's not just the state of Victoria. This is also a problem in SA and WA. Same with NT. I don't know Tassie but I've heard tell it's a problem there, too. The reason the AFL has access to la crème de la crème of athletes in theses places is because it does dominate the sporting landscape. What's particularly concerning is that there are quite a few instances of world-class sports people who went into other sports but had strong ties to Aussie Rules are realistically had decent prospects of playing AFL. A bunch of these basically had the option of choosing. Thankfully, they chose the other sport. Lleyton Hewitt, Patty Mills and Ben Simmons spring to mind. It begs the question, how many others could have done similarly brilliant things in other sports but ended up playing AFL?
|
|
|
|
|
RBBAnonymous
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 3.8K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x@citysam thankyou that is basically the gist of what I was trying to say in my previous post. I should've taken the time to explain my reasoning. Even though football skills and smarts is 'built'. It is built through a lifetime of practice in where by it becomes second nature or 'natural'.Athleticism and genetics in most cases won't come into play until teens/early adulthood when a humans growth is at its peak. I'll admit genetics will limit ones athleticism to an extent but with proper training and coaching, especially if we are talking the elite level, it won't take long for someone to get faster and stronger, 'built' into an athlete. I don't really think this is true, sorry. Some people will never really have much chance of becoming athletic; i.e. fast and agile. They will never be able to run 100m in less than, say, 12 seconds. They'll never be able to accelerate out of traffic very quickly. Or to turn on a penny. It doesn't mean they can't become quicker, more agile, more flexible, or develop very good aerobic fitness levels, or gain excellent core strength. They can learn to hold their own in football. In very technical things, such as swimming they can improve a lot and learn to swim faster than most people or through years of training become a black belt in various martial arts. The ordinary person can do these things. But elite levels of athletic ability are basically innate. And, it's overwhelmingly the case that footballers up front, out wide, and as goalkeepers have these elite levels of athletic ability. I'm not downplaying the importance of true football skills which are only gained through years of practice. I'm saying that countries which have access to footballers who have those skills who are also world-class athletes have a massive advantage. No one is downplaying Athleticism but the most important aspect is touch, technique and skill. A team full of skilled technicians who may not be the best Athletes will always beat a team of Athletes who have no skills. Eg A Liverpool over 45 team will beat a team of Athletic AFL players in a game of football. I know that is an extreme example but the basic premise holds true.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x@ quickflick "Australian football needs access to the best Australian athletes there are" ... no it doesn't, it absoloutly doesn't. It just needs access to people wanting to play their game. The "best atheletes" don't factor into any of their needs It needs both. The former will be the consequence of the latter. Tell me, how many of Cristiano Ronaldo, Leo Messi, Arjen Robben, Gareth Bale, Thierry Henry and so on are not (or were not) world-class athletes? The fact of the matter is it's very unusual for a world-class footballer who plays in the role of striker, fantasista, winger, wingback, fullback or goalkeeper not to be a world-class athlete. That accounts for most of the park. Legitimately every single athlete across every single sport on the planet is a good athlete. Athletes are created by vigorous training, balance will improve, hand eye coordination, fitness, strength and even the ability to accelerate faster can be improved by training and countless more aspects to it are all abilities the individual improved upon in the journey. Ronaldo is the perfect example, do you think he sat on his arse all day and was allowed to do so because of his genetics and still be an absolutely incredible athlete? The answer is no, he trained to such a state to improve and maintain himself at such a masterful athletic ability. Imo, that's not nuanced enough. There's a distinction that needs to be drawn between footballers such as Cristiano Ronaldo and Paul Scholes. Both have played world-class football. But one is a world-class athlete in terms of speed, agility and so on. The other did so brilliantly while not being particularly athletic. Central midfield being more congested it places more weight on football IQ (which Cristiano Ronaldo also has in spades, to be clear). Of course Cristiano Ronaldo has done a hell of a lot work to hone his athletic abilities. But he's still innately quicker and more athletic than most people. There are thousands of footballers alone who are quicker than Ronaldo and athletically superior, the difference is a large portion of them are hacks at the sport. Ronaldo when he came on the scene was this skinny, weak little kid with some pace and superb football technique. He trained and soon became not only quicker but strong and even more technically gifted. Point is Ronaldo made himself the incredible athlete he is today as have the rest of them but what separates them all is footballing ability. Sam, sorry but I disagree with the gist of this (although parts of it are correct, imo). Cristiano Ronaldo is still in the same ballpark as the majority of those footballers who are athletically superior. Whereas, ostensibly, other footballers cannot go through the gears as quickly as he can, he's in the upper echelon of fast and agile footballers. Then there are footballers who are just as athletic (or more) but lack the skill, technical ability, football IQ and mental strength, etc. Those are faster/more agile but not as good at football. As he's still very athletic, they don't have such a big athletic advantage for it to make them superior. The point is that, for specific positions, world-class footballers have the football ability and football smarts (gained through years of training and great coaching) and the athletic ability (which, although it can be improved and requires lots of work, is largely innate). As I say, how many of Cristiano Ronaldo, Leo Messi, Gareth Bale, Arjen Robben, Neymar, Philippe Coutinho, Willian, Eden Hazard, Jordi Alba, Dani Alves, Thierry Henry, Michael Owen, etc. are not (or were not) exceedingly fast and agile? The average person can't realistically hope to match their levels of speed/agility through any amount of training.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x@citysam thankyou that is basically the gist of what I was trying to say in my previous post. I should've taken the time to explain my reasoning. Even though football skills and smarts is 'built'. It is built through a lifetime of practice in where by it becomes second nature or 'natural'.Athleticism and genetics in most cases won't come into play until teens/early adulthood when a humans growth is at its peak. I'll admit genetics will limit ones athleticism to an extent but with proper training and coaching, especially if we are talking the elite level, it won't take long for someone to get faster and stronger, 'built' into an athlete. I don't really think this is true, sorry. Some people will never really have much chance of becoming athletic (in this case, fast and agile) to supreme levels. They will never be able to run 100m in less than, say, 12 seconds. They'll never be able to accelerate out of traffic very quickly. Or to turn on a penny. It doesn't mean they can't become quicker, more agile, more flexible, or develop very good aerobic fitness levels, or gain excellent core strength. They can learn to hold their own in football. In very technical things, such as swimming they can improve a lot and learn to swim faster than most people or through years of training become a black belt in various martial arts. The ordinary person can do these things. But elite levels of athletic ability are basically innate. And, it's overwhelmingly the case that footballers up front, out wide, and as goalkeepers have these elite levels of athletic ability. I'm not downplaying the importance of true football skills which are only gained through years of practice. I'm saying that countries which have access to footballers who have those skills who are also world-class athletes have a massive advantage.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+x+xAFL can take the athletes. After all it's all they have. I'll settle for the skillful sportspeople, I will go on for watching the very best athletes every four years, the AFL can have the leftovers from the olympics. With the utmost respect, this post suggests a misunderstanding of the concepts of skill, technique and athleticism. Relative to sports such as football, cricket and tennis, Aussie Rules does not set so much store by technique (or tactical awareness). But does that mean that the best AFL footballers aren't skillful? No. If anything, it compensates for this by putting additional focus on things such as skill and athleticism. That's why it's not unheard of for someone who has never played Aussie Rules to take it up as an adult and be able to play (with success) in the AFL. It relies on natural skills rather than the kind of technical ability and tactical awareness which are almost always only gained through hours and hours of practice from a fairly young age. In a nutshell, skill in AFL is based almost entirely on athletic ability. In football, it varies. In some parts of the park, skill is based almost entirely on technical ability and tactical awareness. In other parts of the park, it's based on a combination of technical ability, tactical awareness and athletic ability (particularly speed and agility). The thing is that heaps of the best footballers have it all. And the AFL does get a disproportionately large amount of the best athletes in Australia (or gets near them). Imagine if AFL footballers such as Cyril Rioli, Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield, Sam Mitchell and Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti had grown up in households where football was the most popular sport. Imagine if they had been brought up playing football from a young age and coached very well. These are some absolutely world-class athletes and (as AFL footballers go) have very good game awareness, it seems. I wager there's every chance Australia would have Brazilian, German and even Italian defences very worried. Imagine if Tom Rogic and Aaron Mooy could construct passages of play with those kind of footballers. Look at basketball. Patty Mills and Ben Simmonds are both in the NBA. Patty is a superbly gifted athlete and a world-class point guard while Ben Simmonds has the potential to be a once-in-a-generation talent. Both played elite junior Aussie Rules and Patty very nearly went to the AIS on a scholarship for it. Australian basketball has benefited immeasurably from those kind of guys (plus Matthew Dellavedova, Andrew Bogut and so on). Imagine if Australian football could draw upon some of these guys who are so athletic and have great match awareness. The concept is that the Socceroos does have some great athletes Leckie, Smith, Irvine & before them the likes of Cahill & Emerton, all superb athletes, the problem we have is that we don't produce enough touch players. So having all these wonderful AFL athletes in Football would matter little if they cannot master the 1st touch & technique of the Brazilians & very few Australians have been able to master it. Yep, agreed. But if they did master first touch and technique, then having all these wonderful AFL athletes in football would make Australia a world-class football nation, in all likelihood. The point is it's about the law of averages. There needs to be a big enough pool of that from which to draw upon. Only a small proportion of that pool will end up being world-class. But there needs to be the volume in the first place, at least statistically (and almost invariably in reality). Australia, thus far, has struggled to draw upon that volume. Countries such as Germany and Brazil can draw upon that volume. The whole point is that touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. Seeing as they are the hardest to master this should be taught as early as possible and given the greatest importance. Sure to a degree athleticism is important in football but it's more important in a game like AFL. The comparison to play AFL vs Football is non existent. There is no skill at all in AFL. I mean how hard is it to kick a ball 40-50m. I reckon you give me 1-2 hrs with the world's best footballers and they will be kicking goals from the pocket. How hard is it to fumble a Sherrin around. Even "good" AFL players can barely hold on it. It's laughable how ridiculous these supposed best players are. Absolute rubbish. I agree that inveighing against the AFL is justified and can be fun. But it doesn't actually get football in Australia anywhere. What football needs is to start making a big impact on the Australian sporting cultural landscape again. It did very well in 2005 and 2006 (and even before with Harry and Dukes playing so well in the Premier League). But since then things have been rather lacklustre. Touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. But they can be mastered. One huge challenge for Australian football is working out the best way for Australian footballers to master those things. But there's another problem. Those things, in and of themselves, usually aren't sufficient for producing world-class footballers in positions of striker, fantasista and wide players; i.e. touch and technical ability aren't enough for Australia's current problem positions. They're simply some of the crucial components. Crucial, nevertheless. But not the whole picture. World-class footballers in those areas tend to be very fast and agile and have outstanding co-ordination. Those areas can be improved in the individual with practice and knowledge, but they supreme ability there tends to be rather innate. And for that, Australian football needs access to the best Australian athletes there are. Unfortunately, the AFL has rather a profound influence in procuring those type of athletes.What needs to happen is they need to grow up playing football. Or else, Australia will not improve particularly much at football except by extreme fluke. Your comment doesn't hold true for NSW and to a lesser extent Qld. AFL has a niche market in NSW being the smallest of the 4 codes there and although it is trying to grow its penetration of the market only about 5% of AFL listed players come from NSW with about half of those historically from the small population in the Riverina. The number of registered football players in NSW/ACT is about 300k which is about twice what the AFL has in Victoria so in NSW we have a resource of talent to mine unequalled in the country for any code. In NSW the issue isn't other codes taking the cream of the crop of athletes but our code not having the funds to provide the opportunity to the young players coming through. The last part you nailed it Gyfox, this is the source of our problems. Its simple the pathways right now don't cater the kids playing our sport from the grassroots. Which is why our sport is run the wrong way around when it should try to cater for a large number of participants, open up the pathway and more of the athletes we will have at our disposal. That is a problem. But it's also very problematic that throughout the rest of the country, football consistently hasn't access to the best athletes.
|
|
|
|
|
Midfielder
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 4.7K,
Visits: 0
|
What I find sooooooooooo funny is Football has already won ... most can't see it yet as the valuations methodically of crowds / media deals masks whats happening... Just consider the AFL gets hundreds of hours of free radio, 16 and 20 page wrap arounds in newspaper, cross promotional actives with TV networks, key sponsors, has had political support from every government in Australia 100s of millions of dollars of stadiums built for them... Football for many years demonised, and enjoys little to none of the above. Yet we have almost three times the players, a global game, have grown in the face at times brutal opposition. Globalism, more players .......AND .... AND ... a computer game ... As the change of pace happens the speed of the change will increase... We have already won ... just a couple more items to tick off... By far the best example is the following for the cough cough cough highly multi cultural AFL... from the ABS.. I think 2012 and its only got more pronounced .. Open the chart it speaks for itself... http://cdn0.theroar.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Chart.jpg
|
|
|
|
|
Barca4Life
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 13K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xAFL can take the athletes. After all it's all they have. I'll settle for the skillful sportspeople, I will go on for watching the very best athletes every four years, the AFL can have the leftovers from the olympics. With the utmost respect, this post suggests a misunderstanding of the concepts of skill, technique and athleticism. Relative to sports such as football, cricket and tennis, Aussie Rules does not set so much store by technique (or tactical awareness). But does that mean that the best AFL footballers aren't skillful? No. If anything, it compensates for this by putting additional focus on things such as skill and athleticism. That's why it's not unheard of for someone who has never played Aussie Rules to take it up as an adult and be able to play (with success) in the AFL. It relies on natural skills rather than the kind of technical ability and tactical awareness which are almost always only gained through hours and hours of practice from a fairly young age. In a nutshell, skill in AFL is based almost entirely on athletic ability. In football, it varies. In some parts of the park, skill is based almost entirely on technical ability and tactical awareness. In other parts of the park, it's based on a combination of technical ability, tactical awareness and athletic ability (particularly speed and agility). The thing is that heaps of the best footballers have it all. And the AFL does get a disproportionately large amount of the best athletes in Australia (or gets near them). Imagine if AFL footballers such as Cyril Rioli, Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield, Sam Mitchell and Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti had grown up in households where football was the most popular sport. Imagine if they had been brought up playing football from a young age and coached very well. These are some absolutely world-class athletes and (as AFL footballers go) have very good game awareness, it seems. I wager there's every chance Australia would have Brazilian, German and even Italian defences very worried. Imagine if Tom Rogic and Aaron Mooy could construct passages of play with those kind of footballers. Look at basketball. Patty Mills and Ben Simmonds are both in the NBA. Patty is a superbly gifted athlete and a world-class point guard while Ben Simmonds has the potential to be a once-in-a-generation talent. Both played elite junior Aussie Rules and Patty very nearly went to the AIS on a scholarship for it. Australian basketball has benefited immeasurably from those kind of guys (plus Matthew Dellavedova, Andrew Bogut and so on). Imagine if Australian football could draw upon some of these guys who are so athletic and have great match awareness. The concept is that the Socceroos does have some great athletes Leckie, Smith, Irvine & before them the likes of Cahill & Emerton, all superb athletes, the problem we have is that we don't produce enough touch players. So having all these wonderful AFL athletes in Football would matter little if they cannot master the 1st touch & technique of the Brazilians & very few Australians have been able to master it. Yep, agreed. But if they did master first touch and technique, then having all these wonderful AFL athletes in football would make Australia a world-class football nation, in all likelihood. The point is it's about the law of averages. There needs to be a big enough pool of that from which to draw upon. Only a small proportion of that pool will end up being world-class. But there needs to be the volume in the first place, at least statistically (and almost invariably in reality). Australia, thus far, has struggled to draw upon that volume. Countries such as Germany and Brazil can draw upon that volume. The whole point is that touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. Seeing as they are the hardest to master this should be taught as early as possible and given the greatest importance. Sure to a degree athleticism is important in football but it's more important in a game like AFL. The comparison to play AFL vs Football is non existent. There is no skill at all in AFL. I mean how hard is it to kick a ball 40-50m. I reckon you give me 1-2 hrs with the world's best footballers and they will be kicking goals from the pocket. How hard is it to fumble a Sherrin around. Even "good" AFL players can barely hold on it. It's laughable how ridiculous these supposed best players are. Absolute rubbish. I agree that inveighing against the AFL is justified and can be fun. But it doesn't actually get football in Australia anywhere. What football needs is to start making a big impact on the Australian sporting cultural landscape again. It did very well in 2005 and 2006 (and even before with Harry and Dukes playing so well in the Premier League). But since then things have been rather lacklustre. Touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. But they can be mastered. One huge challenge for Australian football is working out the best way for Australian footballers to master those things. But there's another problem. Those things, in and of themselves, usually aren't sufficient for producing world-class footballers in positions of striker, fantasista and wide players; i.e. touch and technical ability aren't enough for Australia's current problem positions. They're simply some of the crucial components. Crucial, nevertheless. But not the whole picture. World-class footballers in those areas tend to be very fast and agile and have outstanding co-ordination. Those areas can be improved in the individual with practice and knowledge, but they supreme ability there tends to be rather innate. And for that, Australian football needs access to the best Australian athletes there are. Unfortunately, the AFL has rather a profound influence in procuring those type of athletes.What needs to happen is they need to grow up playing football. Or else, Australia will not improve particularly much at football except by extreme fluke. Your comment doesn't hold true for NSW and to a lesser extent Qld. AFL has a niche market in NSW being the smallest of the 4 codes there and although it is trying to grow its penetration of the market only about 5% of AFL listed players come from NSW with about half of those historically from the small population in the Riverina. The number of registered football players in NSW/ACT is about 300k which is about twice what the AFL has in Victoria so in NSW we have a resource of talent to mine unequalled in the country for any code. In NSW the issue isn't other codes taking the cream of the crop of athletes but our code not having the funds to provide the opportunity to the young players coming through. The last part you nailed it Gyfox, this is the source of our problems. Its simple the pathways right now don't cater the kids playing our sport from the grassroots. Which is why our sport is run the wrong way around when it should try to cater for a large number of participants, open up the pathway and more of the athletes we will have at our disposal.
|
|
|
|
|
bigpoppa
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.6K,
Visits: 0
|
@citysam thankyou that is basically the gist of what I was trying to say in my previous post.
I should've taken the time to explain my reasoning.
Even though football skills and smarts is 'built'. It is built through a lifetime of practice in where by it becomes second nature or 'natural'.
Athleticism and genetics in most cases won't come into play until teens/early adulthood when a humans growth is at its peak.
I'll admit genetics will limit ones athleticism to an extent but with proper training and coaching, especially if we are talking the elite level, it won't take long for someone to get faster and stronger, 'built' into an athlete.
|
|
|
|
|
City Sam
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 5.5K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x@ quickflick "Australian football needs access to the best Australian athletes there are" ... no it doesn't, it absoloutly doesn't. It just needs access to people wanting to play their game. The "best atheletes" don't factor into any of their needs It needs both. The former will be the consequence of the latter. Tell me, how many of Cristiano Ronaldo, Leo Messi, Arjen Robben, Gareth Bale, Thierry Henry and so on are not (or were not) world-class athletes? The fact of the matter is it's very unusual for a world-class footballer who plays in the role of striker, fantasista, winger, wingback, fullback or goalkeeper not to be a world-class athlete. That accounts for most of the park. Legitimately every single athlete across every single sport on the planet is a good athlete. Athletes are created by vigorous training, balance will improve, hand eye coordination, fitness, strength and even the ability to accelerate faster can be improved by training and countless more aspects to it are all abilities the individual improved upon in the journey. Ronaldo is the perfect example, do you think he sat on his arse all day and was allowed to do so because of his genetics and still be an absolutely incredible athlete? The answer is no, he trained to such a state to improve and maintain himself at such a masterful athletic ability. Imo, that's not nuanced enough. There's a distinction that needs to be drawn between footballers such as Cristiano Ronaldo and Paul Scholes. Both have played world-class football. But one is a world-class athlete in terms of speed, agility and so on. The other did so brilliantly while not being particularly athletic. Central midfield being more congested it places more weight on football IQ (which Cristiano Ronaldo also has in spades, to be clear). Of course Cristiano Ronaldo has done a hell of a lot work to hone his athletic abilities. But he's still innately quicker and more athletic than most people. There are thousands of footballers alone who are quicker than Ronaldo and athletically superior, the difference is a large portion of them are hacks at the sport. Ronaldo when he came on the scene was this skinny, weak little kid with some pace and superb football technique. He trained and soon became not only quicker but strong and even more technically gifted. Point is Ronaldo made himself the incredible athlete he is today as have the rest of them but what separates them all is footballing ability.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+xYou can build an athlete but you can't build a footballer. Actually, it's genes which determine your athleticism. You can improve what you have, but if you're a short, squat clog hopper, you will forever remain that regardless of how hard you work at it. David Luiz did not become a superb 1.9m athlete merely by working hard - genes had a lot to do with it. Mate, check these shot squat clog hoppers resumes out off the top of my head Gerd Muller Thomas Hessler Lothar Mathhaus Dragan Stojkovic Andrea Pirlo Bruno Conti Michael Mifsud. Oh well can't win em all. Gerd Muller was actually very athletic. It's a bit of a myth that he wasn't fast. He accelerated like lightning and was agile. Same with Bruno Conti. I.e. they were outstanding athletes. The others, perhaps, may not have been as naturally athletic (quick and agile) but they played mostly in central midfield where it's a purer football position because of the congestion; reading play well.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x+x+x+x+xAFL can take the athletes. After all it's all they have. I'll settle for the skillful sportspeople, I will go on for watching the very best athletes every four years, the AFL can have the leftovers from the olympics. With the utmost respect, this post suggests a misunderstanding of the concepts of skill, technique and athleticism. Relative to sports such as football, cricket and tennis, Aussie Rules does not set so much store by technique (or tactical awareness). But does that mean that the best AFL footballers aren't skillful? No. If anything, it compensates for this by putting additional focus on things such as skill and athleticism. That's why it's not unheard of for someone who has never played Aussie Rules to take it up as an adult and be able to play (with success) in the AFL. It relies on natural skills rather than the kind of technical ability and tactical awareness which are almost always only gained through hours and hours of practice from a fairly young age. In a nutshell, skill in AFL is based almost entirely on athletic ability. In football, it varies. In some parts of the park, skill is based almost entirely on technical ability and tactical awareness. In other parts of the park, it's based on a combination of technical ability, tactical awareness and athletic ability (particularly speed and agility). The thing is that heaps of the best footballers have it all. And the AFL does get a disproportionately large amount of the best athletes in Australia (or gets near them). Imagine if AFL footballers such as Cyril Rioli, Leroy Jetta, Patrick Dangerfield, Sam Mitchell and Anthony McDonald-Tipungwuti had grown up in households where football was the most popular sport. Imagine if they had been brought up playing football from a young age and coached very well. These are some absolutely world-class athletes and (as AFL footballers go) have very good game awareness, it seems. I wager there's every chance Australia would have Brazilian, German and even Italian defences very worried. Imagine if Tom Rogic and Aaron Mooy could construct passages of play with those kind of footballers. Look at basketball. Patty Mills and Ben Simmonds are both in the NBA. Patty is a superbly gifted athlete and a world-class point guard while Ben Simmonds has the potential to be a once-in-a-generation talent. Both played elite junior Aussie Rules and Patty very nearly went to the AIS on a scholarship for it. Australian basketball has benefited immeasurably from those kind of guys (plus Matthew Dellavedova, Andrew Bogut and so on). Imagine if Australian football could draw upon some of these guys who are so athletic and have great match awareness. The concept is that the Socceroos does have some great athletes Leckie, Smith, Irvine & before them the likes of Cahill & Emerton, all superb athletes, the problem we have is that we don't produce enough touch players. So having all these wonderful AFL athletes in Football would matter little if they cannot master the 1st touch & technique of the Brazilians & very few Australians have been able to master it. Yep, agreed. But if they did master first touch and technique, then having all these wonderful AFL athletes in football would make Australia a world-class football nation, in all likelihood. The point is it's about the law of averages. There needs to be a big enough pool of that from which to draw upon. Only a small proportion of that pool will end up being world-class. But there needs to be the volume in the first place, at least statistically (and almost invariably in reality). Australia, thus far, has struggled to draw upon that volume. Countries such as Germany and Brazil can draw upon that volume. The whole point is that touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. Seeing as they are the hardest to master this should be taught as early as possible and given the greatest importance. Sure to a degree athleticism is important in football but it's more important in a game like AFL. The comparison to play AFL vs Football is non existent. There is no skill at all in AFL. I mean how hard is it to kick a ball 40-50m. I reckon you give me 1-2 hrs with the world's best footballers and they will be kicking goals from the pocket. How hard is it to fumble a Sherrin around. Even "good" AFL players can barely hold on it. It's laughable how ridiculous these supposed best players are. Absolute rubbish. I agree that inveighing against the AFL is justified and can be fun. But it doesn't actually get football in Australia anywhere. What football needs is to start making a big impact on the Australian sporting cultural landscape again. It did very well in 2005 and 2006 (and even before with Harry and Dukes playing so well in the Premier League). But since then things have been rather lacklustre. Touch, skill and technical ability are the hardest parts of football to master. But they can be mastered. One huge challenge for Australian football is working out the best way for Australian footballers to master those things. But there's another problem. Those things, in and of themselves, usually aren't sufficient for producing world-class footballers in positions of striker, fantasista and wide players; i.e. touch and technical ability aren't enough for Australia's current problem positions. They're simply some of the crucial components. Crucial, nevertheless. But not the whole picture. World-class footballers in those areas tend to be very fast and agile and have outstanding co-ordination. Those areas can be improved in the individual with practice and knowledge, but they supreme ability there tends to be rather innate. And for that, Australian football needs access to the best Australian athletes there are. Unfortunately, the AFL has rather a profound influence in procuring those type of athletes.What needs to happen is they need to grow up playing football. Or else, Australia will not improve particularly much at football except by extreme fluke. Your comment doesn't hold true for NSW and to a lesser extent Qld. AFL has a niche market in NSW being the smallest of the 4 codes there and although it is trying to grow its penetration of the market only about 5% of AFL listed players come from NSW with about half of those historically from the small population in the Riverina. The number of registered football players in NSW/ACT is about 300k which is about twice what the AFL has in Victoria so in NSW we have a resource of talent to mine unequalled in the country for any code. In NSW the issue isn't other codes taking the cream of the crop of athletes but our code not having the funds to provide the opportunity to the young players coming through. Fortunately, that's basically true. And that's football's saving grace in Australia. It would be in big trouble if the AFL had influence in NSW and QLD. Nevertheless, that's still a huge part of Australia for which AFL is massive. And it's a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
quickflick
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
+x+x+x@ quickflick "Australian football needs access to the best Australian athletes there are" ... no it doesn't, it absoloutly doesn't. It just needs access to people wanting to play their game. The "best atheletes" don't factor into any of their needs It needs both. The former will be the consequence of the latter. Tell me, how many of Cristiano Ronaldo, Leo Messi, Arjen Robben, Gareth Bale, Thierry Henry and so on are not (or were not) world-class athletes? The fact of the matter is it's very unusual for a world-class footballer who plays in the role of striker, fantasista, winger, wingback, fullback or goalkeeper not to be a world-class athlete. That accounts for most of the park. Legitimately every single athlete across every single sport on the planet is a good athlete. Athletes are created by vigorous training, balance will improve, hand eye coordination, fitness, strength and even the ability to accelerate faster can be improved by training and countless more aspects to it are all abilities the individual improved upon in the journey. Ronaldo is the perfect example, do you think he sat on his arse all day and was allowed to do so because of his genetics and still be an absolutely incredible athlete? The answer is no, he trained to such a state to improve and maintain himself at such a masterful athletic ability. Imo, that's not nuanced enough. There's a distinction that needs to be drawn between footballers such as Cristiano Ronaldo and Paul Scholes. Both have played world-class football. But one is a world-class athlete in terms of speed, agility and so on. The other did so brilliantly while not being particularly athletic. Central midfield being more congested it places more weight on football IQ (which Cristiano Ronaldo also has in spades, to be clear). Of course Cristiano Ronaldo has done a hell of a lot work to hone his athletic abilities. But he's still innately quicker and more athletic than most people.
|
|
|
|