THE reactions to Scotland's 1-0 defeat by Argentina on Wednesday were predictably varied, ranging from disapproval of George Burley and his team to the view that it was, in the circumstances, an acceptably spirited performance. But, of all the criticisms directed at Burley, the most misguided and ill-founded was the one made by a former player let loose on a newspaper column.
He did not so much accuse as find the national team manager guilty of being "a soft touch" and easily manipulated, on the grounds that he had readily acquiesced to the SFA's decision to contract a fixture that was nothing more than a potential money-
making exercise.
Burley, he insisted, had been forced to take a match he would not have wanted, at home to opponents whose style of play would not approximate to that which the Scots are likely to face in their next World Cup qualifier, away to the Netherlands at the end of March. This is a rather flimsy base from which to launch such an attack on his target's moral fibre.
Had the former player given the matter proper thought, he may have realised that he would have to level the same criticism at every manager in the game, including those he once played for and the two who are currently in charge of the champions of Scotland and England, Gordon Strachan and Sir Alex Ferguson.
No manager is exempt from the financial imperatives of a game that is as much a business as it is a sport, no board of directors free of the obligation to maximise income and minimise outgoings at every opportunity. Does anyone – including Burley's defamer – seriously believe that Ferguson and Harry Redknapp, the latter then in charge of Portsmouth, were really keen on playing each other in an exhibition match in Abuja, Nigeria, in July? Or that the Manchester United manager relishes the global expeditions made annually by his team in the cause of springing new revenue streams?
Similarly, Gordon Strachan knew that, when Celtic signed Shunsuke Nakamura, the deal would include energy-testing visits to Japan at awkward times of the year that would not be made simply for the purpose of spreading goodwill. As with the Scottish champions' fixtures-crammed tours of North America, these lengthy excursions are made specifically to promote the "brand" and to generate substantial sponsorship fees.
Strachan's "enthusiasm" for such odysseys may be gauged from his comment on returning from the one in 2006, in which the matches in the United States were so close to each other on the calendar and so distant geographically that the time between them was filled mainly by flying from one city to the next. "Never again", would be an appropriately concise precis of his feelings.
Because of economic necessity, of course, there was not the slightest chance of his wish being granted, and the Parkhead club duly returned to America the following year. It was noticeable, however, on that occasion, that a compromise of sorts had been reached, as they played only two games, one in Denver, the other in Chicago.
At a less lucrative, but no less relevant level, Mixu Paatelainen surely would not have welcomed the news that Hibernian would be involved in an Intertoto Cup tie as early as 6 July this year. The big Finn, too, might have experienced that sinking feeling on discovering that his team's opponents would be the Swedes of Elfsborg, at the time in the middle of their domestic championship, fully wound up and ready for the two victories – 2-0 in each leg – they would secure against the Easter Road side. As several managers of my acquaintance have confirmed, a competitive European fixture at that time of year disrupts pre-season schedules and kills the possibility of the manager enjoying ideal preparation for the forthcoming domestic programme. Most significantly in terms of their prospects in the tests that lie ahead, a full recovery from the destabilisation can take months. They also agreed that managers everywhere are subject to directives from their board, based entirely on either the making or the saving of money, that, from a purely sporting perspective, they could do without.
As for the notion that Burley on Wednesday should have been playing a friendly away from home against opposition similar in style to Holland, it is difficult to think of a weaker argument. Simulation of forthcoming events is not the purpose of "challenge" matches, since it is clearly impossible to predict with any certainty that the form will be reproduced. In international football, even more than in the club game, it is inevitable that the personnel involved will be significantly different.
In effectively accusing Burley of spinelessness, the "columnist" should surely have laid the same charge against Diego Maradona and, for instance, every manager who has ever held the post with Brazil. Argentina's next World Cup qualifier – it should be remembered that Maradona was appointed to revitalise a campaign that has been flagging alarmingly – is to be played in South America, almost certainly under a hot southern hemisphere sun. For what possible reason, apart from their £800,000 fee, could the Argentine FA agree to a match in Scotland on a cold, wet and windy November night?
As for Brazil, they are the Harlem Globetrotters of football. The general populace rarely see their national team play friendlies in the flesh, since they are almost invariably played abroad. This is entirely attributable to the fact that they command the highest appearance money of any country in the world. There is no known example of one of their managers opposing the practice.
The full article contains 949 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
