Australia disappointingly exited the Olympics with a 1-1 draw to Serbia, then 1-0 losses to Argentina and Ivory Coast. After being out-muscled against Serbia and outclassed against Argentina, Australia had their chance to progress from the group with a win over Ivory Coast. Unfortunately, they were devoid of ideas when going forward, and let themselves down with poor finishing. They had problems all tournament with their attacking ideas. Some of that was attributed to Argentina in that particular game, who masterfully controlled the game. When Australia finally gained the ball, they were at a loss to do anything with it. That's partially circumstantial of the Argentine pressure, but also a result of poor preparation that only involved 3 matches against Asian teams. One positive from the tournament was the outstanding defence. Especially against Argentina, who were the eventual champions and destroyer of Brazil 3-0 in the semis. Australia held them out until late in the game. The decision to select Jade North as an over-age player proved a success. So too Dave Carney on the left, who was about the only player to give the team any zest, and set up the only goal the team scored for the tournament.
As for Archie Thompson as a striker, that was a total failure, only intensifying the perplexity of the player's selection in the first place. It was doubtful that he would add much more than incumbent Bruce Djite. That was only amplified in the unsuitable loan striker role that he played. When you consider Craig Moore, Tim Cahill and John Aloisi were the choice of over-age players in Athens 4 years ago, it seems incomprehensible the selection of such lower profile of the over-age players that were selected for this team. If you can't get the guns, stick with the under-age players. Unless you need to fill holes, as was the case with North and Carney.
The end of the Games also ends the despicable and disgusting media war led primarily by SBS "journalists". Craig Foster launched his final salvo with a vicious attack, this time in the Fairfax newspapers. He probably had it pre-written and actively cheering Australia to fail. It all relates to the "development vs results" debate in that since Australia has no hope in winning, don't select over-age players for your best team possible. Off course, selecting someone like Jade North was great for his development and for results, for he will probably be leading the senior team defence one day.
In Foster's enthusiasm for his pathetic "I told you so" attack, one of his comments made folly of his own words in that performance is the key: "Nathan Burns, James Holland and Bruce Djite should never have been omitted from Games squad. And all the talk of a results-based campaign has been exposed as folly. The irony is that these players were likely candidates to have brought results."
So the argument is about results and that North, Carney and Thompson were unlikely to make much difference? The criticism is against those under-age players that were selected, not so much the philosophy?
Thompson was the key in this saga. Had it been a Viduka, Kewell or Cahill in the team instead, unlikely this debate would have got any traction.
Full article: http://www.smh.com.au/news/football/olyroos-devoid-of-inspiration-as-arnold-leads-australia-on-anotherfailed-campaign/2008/08/16/1218307312575.html
As much as the football team failed, they were never a realistic medal chance. That was another fault made - that FFA and the coach put an unrealistic target on the team. Not so much that it impacted the team, but it only gave ammunition for goons like Foster to continue their childish agendas. As mentioned in the preview, this entire Australian Olympic team looked set to dominate the gold medal standings like never before. The swimmers were set for 11 gold. That was even according to famed magazine Sports Illustrated. In fact, they had Australia set to win 54 medals, 22 of them gold. The IOC's own medal projections had 42 medals with 20 gold. The end result was 46 medals with 14 gold.
Australia did really well in total medals. Outstanding. But the conversion to gold was diabolical. Looking at swimming specifically, in the 11 events I had marked, six failed. Add to that the men's 100free during the games, in which Eamon Sullivan broke the world record, seven failed. That's the majority of events in which Australia were favourite to win, failed. We did get one back in the w4*200 relay to help compensate. The fact the "swimming team" won 6 in total does not excuse the failure of those in other events. Leisel Jones (200breast), Lisbeth Trickett (50free, 100free), Jessica Schipper (200fly), Sullivan (50free, 100free) and Grant Hackett (1500free) were the culprits. While we can point two these swimmers being beaten by world records, everyone was breaking world records and setting personal bests at this meet. Everyone except these "guns". Why?
Of Jones and Schipper that were beaten by world records, Schipper maybe the only one with a legitimate excuse because her WR was beaten comprehensively. While Jones' WR was beaten, she was actually no where near on pace. Of the other failures, if they do their personal best times, they win gold. It is that simple, and it's a cataclysmic failure of the system when you have so many swimmers fail.
It is not the first time either. This disease has plagued the swimming team since Atlanta. Instead of doing anything about it, those that do win gold are paraded and pampered as heroes, as the failures are swept under the carpet and their silvers and bronzes are still celebrated as a good result.
Much of this problem is obviously the coaching. They cite the number of medals in total. In this case, 20 was the best ever result. Had 2 or 3 events failed, you can accept that. There will be surprises. They won't all win. Just as the women's 4*200 got up to win gold in a surprise. But unacceptable for 7 out of 12 to fail. Not just fail. Fail abysmally. Trickett barely made the final in the 100free.
The second part of the problem is the broadcaster. They do not tell the audience of anticipated results if an Australian is likely to win so as not to set up for any disappointment in case of a loss. Unfortunate that swimmers have broken so many WRs recently and won world championships that the print media, at least, has been able to make a few snipes. That is as far as it goes, though, because the Olympics is about celebrating all the gold and showing them in best light to the public for their sponsors and for future government funding. How shocking would it have been had the headlines ready "Lisbeth Loses", or "Sullivan Flops", or "Liesel Chokes Again". Thank god for Stephanie Rice, who did rise to the challenge and had to break her own world in one event and re-take a world record in another event to win gold and set-up the 4*200 relay team for success. Without her, Australia would have left the pool with a disastrous 3 gold.
Rice was not the only success. Lesser lights of the team excelled, notably her relay teammates, Stoeckl in the backstroke, Rickard in the breaststroke, and Lauterstein in the fly. They rallied above their personal bests to gain minor medals. True champions. We also saw similar evidence of lesser lights in other sports rising to the challenge like Mitcham in the diving, Hooker in the pole vault and Wallace in the kayaking - all taking gold later in the Games. Yet our major high-profile stars flop?
This is a flaw in the Australian sporting psyche that I've been observing for some years now. Australia likes to dominate when dominant. Their only answer to any threat to their supremacy is dominate further. Instead of respecting the opposition, engaging in a tough fight to succeed, and swimming their own race (in this circumstance), they blaze away like scalded cats and then fold at the end. When you see Phelps threatened in his race, he is 7th at the turn and comes home to win. For an Australian, they are out at blistering world record pace, and get over-run. While Jones in the 200breast had her world record taken, the cruel realisation is that she was nearly 2 seconds off it herself. This is despite going out at 1sec under it and then dragging the American girl Soni along with her. Why not let Soni set the pace? She's the one that should be in fear of Jones, and Jones smart enough to swim her own race. Trickett and Sullivan had equal brain explosions. In Trickett's race, the German Britta Stefan was last at the turn, and won.
It's easy to pinpoint the origins of this disease: Greg Norman and the Australia cricket team. Both are totally dominant players in their field and both horrific chokers. Norman lost so many majors when leading the final round simply by blazing away and trying to win by greater. The cricketers will try smash every ball for six when batting or set outrageously attacking fields when bowling. Even in soccer you could point to Uruguay in 2001 when with a 1-0 lead from the home leg, the mantra for the away game was to go score a goal. Within 10 minutes Australia had conceded.
The lesser lights do not have this problem. They don't have the ego yet and will exemplify the fighting Australian spirit that many like to think exists. However, the stars cannot fight, unless they are already horribly down and in a position of nothing to lose. Until Australians recognise this disease, continue long will be these ugly failures and horrible disrespect for their opposition.
Why am I even discussing other sports? For countries like Australia that have strong overall Olympic teams, football does take a backseat. Why sweat it out for 6 matches over 90 minutes each when the same reward is swimming a couple of laps? If Australia makes the semi finals, it's the time to care. In that sense, football seems unfit for the Games. The more powerful nations really don't support it. However, for weaker Olympic nations, it is still a huge event. Cameroon won in Sydney and it's about the only chance for a nation like them to win gold. Argentina won both major team sports in Athens (basketball the other) to be their only golds, and football again to go with a gold in sailing. TV ratings in these countries are huge, and crowds at the Games are consistently the biggest of any sport at the Olympics. While Australians - and even myself - don't really care, too much of the world does. If we do manage to make the gold medal game one day, it could well be the gold that we really rejoice the most.
Sailing returned two gold, however, they, unlike the swimmers, expressed disappointment in not winning more. With world champions and favourites in three other classes, a haul of 4, even 5, was on. Men's Laser finished almost last, lacking speed for the entire regatta. The Tornado returned a silver, just behind Spain for gold. The 49er were leading the final race with gold in hands before capsizing in wicked conditions, ultimately placing fifth in a closely run series. Denmark took the gold and would have been unlucky to lose it given they were leading into the final race and broke their mast pre-start. The sailors have vowed for revenge in London in 4 years time. Interestingly, the British Laser sailor said the win of both 470 classes by Australia was like a knife in the side to him, and he made sure he went out to win his class. Britain won 4 sailing gold.
Cycling disappointed with 0 gold compared to Athens with 6. However, they were not favoured to win anything on the track, with Britain winning an astonishing 9 gold at the world championships just a few months prior to the Games, and then winning 7 of the 10 during the Games. However, of the four road events, it would have been hoped that at least one gold medal was returned. Closest to any medal was Cadel Evans 5th in the time trial and Michael Rogers 6th in the road race.
Rowing returned two gold, with the men's double sculls a minor surprise. They were up there, but not a clear favourite. The fours snuck a silver just behind Britain - amazing considering these rowers were the next best of those chose for the eight. Why priority was not given to the four with the four best rowers in there and the next best 8 into the eight can only be deemed an error. The quad sculls just missed bronze. The women had a horror Games with zero medals. This despite world champions and hot favourites in double sculls. Having a boat qualified in every class, the only nation to achieve this, the rowers were expecting at least one more medal, hopefully a gold. The Brits won the medal tally here with there two gold and more minor medals.
Shooting was expecting maybe one gold, but the only return was a bronze. They've done well with at least one gold in the past 3 Olympics. Difficult to be critical of them.
Equestrian had a solid 3-day eventing team in both individual and team classifications. Three reached the top 10 in individual, while the team only just missed gold by 1 fallen rail in the showjumping. A double gold would not have surprised. The team silver was still a great reward.
Athletics did well despite the lack of Rawlinson in w400h and Deakes in m50walk. One gold, two silver and a bronze would have been the hopeful return before the Games - with these stars in the team. It's also yet another message to our high profile swimmers of the definition of toughing it out, and also some of our track stars that seem more interested in wearing the latest sunglasses than training hard and putting on their best possible performance.
Kayaking would have hoped for some medals. A gold and two bronze was excellent.
Triathlon returned a gold in the women's race - my favourite of the Games, which even produced a small tear. Triathlon is a sport that Australia has dominated since almost inception, consistently producing world champions, yet the Olympic return has been quite poor. The women have been close with silver in the past two Games and much hope was on triple world champion Emma Snowsill to succeed, even if this season Portugal's Fernandes had been most dominant and favourite for the race. It was wonderful that Snowsill finally triumphed, especially since she seems such a delightful person. The bonus with this race was also Australia taking the bronze. Fernandes did take the silver.
Hockey was never really a chance for the women on recent form and Games form. The men disappointed somewhat blowing a 2-0 lead in the semi against Spain only to smash the Netherlands 6-2 in the bronze medal game. Germany beat Spain in the final, 1-0.
Diving was hopeful to sneak a gold from the all-powering Chinese here, but who'd of thought it would take until the final event with the men's platform? Made all the more exciting by the extremely delightful and humble winner that was Matthew Mitcham.
Women's basketball made their worst capitulation ever to the USA in the gold medal game. Again this "dominator syndrome" seemed to be in effect. They went out blazing away and, worst of all, played an injured player. USA were always favoured to win, but not for Australia to fold like it did. Hopefully a reality check for the girls and to take 2012 with a bit more measure. Yes, time to lose the body-suits too.
Difficult to go past Usain Bolt winning the m100 so easily and in world record time, only then to back up in the m200 to take Michael Johnson's seemingly "world record for the ages" world record and for Jamaica to take the 4*100 relay world record. He behaved like a clown before and after the race, and wore gold boots. The whole world would have shunned such arrogance had he been American, but being Jamaican only made him seem more lovable.
Michael Phelps in swimming didn't quite have the lustre as he was a virtual certainty for six of his races, with the 100fly a warm favourite, and the 4*100relay the only precarious event. In fact, France were hot favourites on times, and led the final leg by a body length with their world record holder anchoring. How they, or should I say Bernard, lost that, will remain a great mystery. Especially when he then went and won the individual race. Happy for him, but not for his relay teammates. They can only query why he couldn't manage even half a good a swim in the relay to make them Olympic champions as well, and no doubt are seething in the background, throwing knives into Bernard effigies they'd have hung up in their bedroom. I know I was horrified to see Bernard win. It was not that he edged out the Australian. But because he just screwed out his relay teammates.
Zimbabwe's Kirsty Coventry took 3 silvers in 3 races behind the rampaging Stephanie Rice in the medleys and USA's Nathalie Coughlin in the 100back, before finally winning the 200back. What a relief. That silver in the 100back came after Coventry broke the world record in the semi final and couldn't back it up in the final. She has won all but one of Zimbabwe's medals in Olympic history. That one being women's hockey gold at the Moscow Olympics.
Always nice to see small countries doing something. There was Togo getting a bronze in slalom kayak of all things, Latvia winning gold in the men's BMX in a truly exciting event and worth addition to the Games and, my favourite, Estonia getting silver in men's double sculls in rowing. Why my favourite? Being a Vanilla Ninja fan and a visitor to Estonia recently, Estonia is my second country, naturally! Had they deadheated for the win, it would have been my ultimate dream, considering Australia was the crew that won the race. They won quite easily, with Estonia doing well to overtake Britain and just edge them out for second. The Estonian government had a reward of 1.6mil EEK (about 150,000 USD) for a gold medal, and 1.1mil for silver. The rowers of Jüri Jaanson and Tõnu Endrekson had to split their reward, while Estonia's only other medallist, gold medallist Gerd Kanter in the discus, took 1.6.
Britain had an outstanding Games with 19 gold from 47 medals. They tailed off slightly towards the end of the Games with their male triple-jumper (silver), female BMX racer (crashed) and open-water swimming (two silvers, one bronze) not fully delivering. Had they done so, it would have been well over 20 gold. Still, they made up for it with the cyclists (8), sailors (4), rowers (2) and Rebecca Adlington in the pool (2) contributing 16 of their total. The others came in men's kayak, women's 400 on track and boxing. Disturbingly, there's been the usual Australian whinging, with the ludicrous argument of population base as some sort of mitigating circumstance for Australia losing out. The harsh truth is that Australia sent 100 more athletes to the Games, with it being the fifth largest team behind China, USA, Russia and Germany, and consistently send large teams. No, we are not the small team of "aussie battlers" that rises against insurmountable forces. We are an Olympic power that should finish around the top 5. For Britain to finish ahead is less about population base and more about superior sporting expertise from their smaller team. Britain entered the Games with approximately 18 obvious gold medal chances. Guess what? They delivered. Australia didn't. We should marvel in their level of performance, not deride it.
Had Channel 7 shown more events that didn't involve Australians competing, no doubt I 'd have more highlights...
Let's throw in Germany's Matthias Steiner in the super-heavyweight weightlifting. He lost his wife in a car accident a year ago, and needed to lift 10kg more than he ever lifted before in competition to take the gold. He did, and his mix of jubilation and crying provided the audience with a sense of the emotional turmoil that he was experiencing. On the medal dais, with a photo of his wife in his hands, barely a dry eye in the place. That included his fellow medallists on the dais. This was not in response to a man who suffered such a terrible tragedy, but a response to a man who was a true champion.
In a situation reminiscent to 2004, Australia will meet Argentina and Serbia (albeit minus the Montenegro) in the Beijing Olympics. The third team in the group is Ivory Coast. They meet Serbia first, and would hope to emulate the 5-1 victory from 2004. Then the tough game against Argentina. If they can qualify from the group, they'll meet either Netherlands, USA, Nigeria or Japan from Group B. Australia's best performance at an Olympics is fourth in 1992.
Australia's women's team, the Matilidas, failed to qualify for the Olympics.
Unfortunately any focus on the Games themselves has been over-shadowed by an ugly spat involving various sections of the media, the coach and general supporters of the game. Coach Graham Arnold seemed to have made even greater enemies of SBS with his decision to drop Bruce Djite and Nathan Burns for over-age players. Both Djite and Burns were regulars through the qualifying phase, and it seems harsh, especially for Djite, who had just broken into the senior national team. Burns had been quite inconsistent, even with his club team, and the omission there can be understood. The over-age players that have come in are Jade North, David Carney and Archie Thompson. SBS argues that Australia should be sending a team with the idea of developing players for the next World Cup, while others believe the team should be sent to achieve the best possible result. The FFA themselves publicly set a hopeful target of a medal.
Problem with anything that SBS says these days is their nasty track record and seeming vendetta against Australian and British-background coaches. Craig Foster even had the outrageous suggestion that the team should be picked for Arnold. Once it was made clear that the focus of the team was for results and not development, the next step was for the theworldgame website to publish a staggering piece of "journalism" by Les Murray proclaiming that the Games themselves have always been a development tournament, therefore the team sent should be for development. This is absolute garbage on many fronts, as Murray's own expose of the Games' football tournament history shows it was more about amateurs and "shamateurs" (virtual professional teams from former eastern Europe) and Uruguayans trying to claim world champion status for winning gold. For the teams that ultimately do go, regardless of their composition, they still go to win. Just as they do for current day U17 & U20 tournaments that actually have Fifa designated developmental ideals through their age restrictions in place since inception.
This nonsensical article all came in response to SBS's belief that Arnold picked the wrong team, and that their once precious opinion had been made redundant by the realisation of the team's objective for results over development, meaning the best possible team must be picked. Since they don't have an argument anymore over the value of the over-age players against those younger players omitted, let's fabricate an article to change the ground rules of the Olympic tournament so our now obsolete opinion can be made valid again.
Lost in this is the debate over the actual player selection. Replacing Djite with Thompson seems to add very little to the team, even if Djite's finishing ability in front of goal is dreadful and hopelessly erratic at times, and Thompson's more seasoned approach could be a worthy enough edge. Regardless of independent opinion on this, Arnold is the coach, and it is his decision. He will live and die by it, just as he did through the qualifying campaign. Quickly forgotten is that he did bring the team through the tough final phase of qualifying, of which required him to win the group, unlike the senior team that can finish third and still have an extra chance of qualifying.
Murray's final summary:
So the suggestion that Olympic football's most important role is acting as a
vehicle for team building, and World Cup aspiration, is not an opinion. It’s fact,
and an inescapable fact.
That is the reality that was missed when Bruce Djite and Nathan Burns were overlooked for
the Beijing squad.
We may rue the day, come the campaigns for the World Cups of 2010 and 2014.
If Australia's 2010 and 2014 World Cup campaigns hinge on Bruce Djite and Nathan Burns playing possibly three games at the Beijing Olympics, then we are already in trouble.
The full article for fans to make up there own mind:
theworldgame.sbs.com.au/blogs/lesmurray/let-the-games---and-the-team-building---begin-124678
07 August 2008, Shanghai: v Serbia
10 August 2008, Shanghai: v Argentina
13 August 2008, Tianjin: v Ivory Coast
Group A: Argentina, Ivory Coast, Australia, Serbia
Group B: Netherlands, USA, Nigeria, Japan
Group C: China, Brazil, Belgium, New Zealand
Group D: Italy, Korea Republic, Cameroon, Honduras
Long-term readers will know the Socceroo Realm loves the Olympics. I take holidays for them. Those same readers may also be aware of the criticism I've placed on the swimming team, especially the Sydney games. Despite the media hyped triumph of previous Olympics and apparently "high" gold medal tally, the team has flopped, performing way under expectations of those "in the know". There was Kowalski and Reilly in Atlanta, and the lame excuses of "it's a racing meet" for failing to approach personal best times that otherwise would have won gold. Sydney had O'Neill lose the 200fly, Klim and Huegill blowing the 100fly and even Thorpe losing the 200free. Athens had Jones in women's breaststroke totally flop and the men's 4*200free debacle swimming their slowest swimmers first and Thorpe last. A check of the medal tally an over proportion of minor medals against gold.
This disease has spread among other sports, especially Atlanta, which had a ridiculous 41 bronze medals compared to the 9 gold won. Sydney's 16 gold was the absolutely worst case scenario with 25 silver telling the real story. The gold tally should have been 20, and with an over-achievement of 25.
Athens did well correcting the imbalance between gold and minor medals. The cyclists there helped recoup any lost gold in the pool.
Beijing should be the Olympics the swimming team finally turns it on. If the team wins anything less that 10 gold, it should be a national disgrace and a government inquiry held. Eleven gold is the optimum and a whopping 15 a real possibility providing all those capable swim to ability. The women should dominate with 50free, 100free, 100fly, 200fly, 100im, 200im, 100breast, 200breast and 4*100medley a virtual lock in. That's 9. Then add possibilities in 200free, 800free, 4*100free and 4*200free. For the men, 1500free and either 50free or 100free are a lock. That's the 11 locks in total. Other chances are either 50free or 100free, 400free, and one of the relays, maybe even two. Adding all those you are at 17-18 gold. Of course, not all will swim to peak performance, and swimmers from other nations can step up.
Despite the subdue nature of coaches and officials with regards to medal projections, the world's media has not been conned, with the swimming team attracting huge interest on arrival. The US team has been conspicuously quiet with ominous reality of them about to lose their supremacy in the pool for the first time ever. Even their major star, Michael Phelps, will not stop the Australian rampage as all his events do not cross over with Australia's strong events.
Elsewhere, triathlon is the other sport that finally needs to deliver on its promise and win both men's and women's races.
Cycling should deliver a couple of gold, even if Britain will be one brutal beast on the velodrome.
Rowing, women's basketball, men's hockey, sailing and shooting all have strong gold medal chances.
Add to that the surprise medals invariably won, and Australia should break the magical 20 gold barrier with ease. In fact, less than 20 gold will be under-achieving, with less than 15 an outrage. Twenty five gold, while being a magical performance, should not surprise. If that does eventuate, remember where you heard it first, and really celebrate a true achievement for the team.