Round 3: Sydney FC - 7:50pm AEST - AAMI Park

[haz]

There has been no confirmation of the cap going next season. Don't get your hopes up

[belaguttman]

7 minutes ago, playmaker said:

 

Something underlying is definitely broken.

 

Hopefully something is broken, rather than this being the best we can do!

[jw1739]

28 minutes ago, haz said:

There has been no confirmation of the cap going next season. Don't get your hopes up

TBH, I think notions of the cap going any time soon may be wishful thinking on the part of Melbourne City fans. Even if the League becomes independent, there are nine other clubs - maybe there will be 11 or 13 - and some of them will no doubt prefer the cap to remain to prevent the wealthier clubs from becoming an elite. As is happening, or has happened, in Europe (and possibly elsewhere too).

[Inchcolm]

If Australian teams want to be competitive and successful in the Asia cup they will need to lose the cap.

[playmaker]

It really irritates me that even our manager brings this up as an excuse.

It just a cop out tbh.

These are the rules and you play within them like everyone other team, and if you are not good enough then take responsibility and change what you are doing because obviously what you are doing is not good enough.

Everything should be up for scrutiny starting with recruiting, to player management, to leadership and culture, and training to on field tactics, strategies and performances.

The end result of it is that we are not good enough and has nothing to do with the cap or any other rule in this league.

If CFG can't succeed under these rules it just means they are incompetent and can only succeed by buying trophies, well unfortunately you can't do that here, so if CFG don't like it and continually lay blame on the rules for a lack of success, then pack up and leave.

Sell the club and piss off.

Winning games is on you and no-one or nothing else. 

Take responsibility and stop with the whinging.

 

[HEARTinator]

The salary cap isn’t the problem. It hasn’t been a problem for Sydney over the last few years and it wasn’t a problem last year when the Tards came with an outside run and relegated us from the Asian Champions league spot. The salary cap is a problem for some munchkins that run our club. The more things change the more they stay the same. FMD 

[Torn Asunder]

Fuck off the salary cap.

As long as it exists, the game in this country suffers and will be a joke.

Good on FFA Shitney and Muscunt’s Tards for continuing to win in a salary capped league (which is supposed to even out), but in reality it’s just a false economy of success.

This is not AFL/NRL, it’s the World Game

[n i k o]

I've finally managed to re watch the highlights of this game and I think if this is anything to go by there are some serious issues in this team. Given this was our first home game with a good crowd the motivation should have been high. But looking at the game again there is a serious motivational issue amongst the playing group. I have never seen so much ball watching before in my life as there was during each of the three goals we copped. What is the source of the lack of desperation that would allow such an insipid performance. 

We have seen time and time again over the years this teams lack of fight, resilience and motivation. One could argue that we came back against the tards and CCM, but when you look at our seasons collectively how can such a behaviour continue to show itself over and over? Is there a bigger cultural issue at the club amongst the mens team. Do the objectives from further up in the management of the club filter down amongst the manager and the players? The best comparison is the womens team...

When we look at the success of the womens team the one obvious that stands out is there is no overhanging ulterior motive for the teams existence. CFG wont be making money from them performing well, nor be able to sell players off for huge profit. The teams existence is there to give female footballers a fantastic platform to train and be the best they can be and to be a successful football team. It's a simple formula. Go back to the mens team and then you see the priorities are far more complex...

Our objectives don't simply revolve around being successful.There are many factors that this club tries to tow such as our lack of investment in players for political purposes, youth investment as a financial source of income to CFG, our playing style affected to fullfill marketing and imaging parameters. When you break that down further then you start to see decisions made not just for football success: 

- Employing a coach that could bring success but that will develop youth

- Signing players that don't suit a system the system of play required to be successful for the purpose of youth development

- Marquee signings that are made for the purpose of influence within the league rather than success of the club

- Game style influenced by corporate management rather than playing group qualities

- A lack of clear intent in the pursuit of success and trophies

These are just some of a number of factors that are influencing the mens team that I can see. When you break them down further there are so many question marks over decisions made at this club. We are now half a decade in and still there are issues. I don't see us being fortunate enough, and I say that because we have so many factors that must fall in place for this to happen, in being champions for quite some time yet with these issues at hand. 

[jw1739]

The only point that I would make there is that IMO there is a socio-political agenda in running the women's team and making it successful, in that to do so reflects better on owners whose socio-political system in their country pretty much consigns women to be second-class citizens. In fact IMO this is a deliberate strategy to make the "brand" more acceptable than it might otherwise be. This might be a cynical view, but it's what I think.

Other than that point IMO you are right on target with your observations and conclusion(s). Also I suspect that a lot of us, and others connected with football in Australia, are also coming to your conclusions.

[n i k o]

4 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

The only point that I would make there is that IMO there is a socio-political agenda in running the women's team and making it successful, in that to do so reflects better on owners whose socio-political system in their country pretty much consigns women to be second-class citizens. In fact IMO this is a deliberate strategy to make the "brand" more acceptable than it might otherwise be. This might be a cynical view, but it's what I think.

Other than that point IMO you are right on target with your observations and conclusion(s). Also I suspect that a lot of us, and others connected with football in Australia, are also coming to your conclusions.

I agree completely. But this agenda isnt one that affects the team in a negative way. In fact it works as a positive from how I see it because success=better image in the public eye. This is the only reason I didnt put it down in my post. 

[AXIOM]

1 hour ago, n i k o said:

I've finally managed to re watch the highlights of this game and I think if this is anything to go by there are some serious issues in this team. Given this was our first home game with a good crowd the motivation should have been high. But looking at the game again there is a serious motivational issue amongst the playing group. I have never seen so much ball watching before in my life as there was during each of the three goals we copped. What is the source of the lack of desperation that would allow such an insipid performance. 

We have seen time and time again over the years this teams lack of fight, resilience and motivation. One could argue that we came back against the tards and CCM, but when you look at our seasons collectively how can such a behaviour continue to show itself over and over? Is there a bigger cultural issue at the club amongst the mens team. Do the objectives from further up in the management of the club filter down amongst the manager and the players? The best comparison is the womens team...

When we look at the success of the womens team the one obvious that stands out is there is no overhanging ulterior motive for the teams existence. CFG wont be making money from them performing well, nor be able to sell players off for huge profit. The teams existence is there to give female footballers a fantastic platform to train and be the best they can be and to be a successful football team. It's a simple formula. Go back to the mens team and then you see the priorities are far more complex...

Our objectives don't simply revolve around being successful.There are many factors that this club tries to tow such as our lack of investment in players for political purposes, youth investment as a financial source of income to CFG, our playing style affected to fullfill marketing and imaging parameters. When you break that down further then you start to see decisions made not just for football success: 

- Employing a coach that could bring success but that will develop youth

- Signing players that don't suit a system the system of play required to be successful for the purpose of youth development

- Marquee signings that are made for the purpose of influence within the league rather than success of the club

- Game style influenced by corporate management rather than playing group qualities

- A lack of clear intent in the pursuit of success and trophies

These are just some of a number of factors that are influencing the mens team that I can see. When you break them down further there are so many question marks over decisions made at this club. We are now half a decade in and still there are issues. I don't see us being fortunate enough, and I say that because we have so many factors that must fall in place for this to happen, in being champions for quite some time yet with these issues at hand. 

Wasn't WJ brought in for this exact reason? Too change the culture, motivation within the playing group? The issue you see Niko what do you think is the problem? 

[n i k o]

3 minutes ago, AXIOM said:

Wasn't WJ brought in for this exact reason? Too change the culture, motivation within the playing group? The issue you see Niko what do you think is the problem? 

How can any of us know the real problem except to make broad generalisations. I may be completely off the mark with my post but my thinking is like this and is why I'm certain of is something is 100% wrong further up. We have 3 main and obvious 'tiers' of management at the club:

1. CFG Management (Pearce, Sorian)

2. Melbourne City FC Management (Munn etc.)

3. Team Management (Joyce)

We have had numerous changes at the third tier within the club and the most personal changes. Players have constantly changed, we've had coach changes, we've had changes in support staff surrounding the team management.

We have seen minimal and no change at all in the Management of Melbourne City FC at club level and at CFG Management level, respectively. This is where the lines are blurred as to who has what say over what. This is where we can only speculate who drives the directives of the Team Management level. But I'd guess looking at how we manage our team that a lot of directive is coming from CFG Management and then Melbourne City FC management is left then to work within these parameters to achieve CFGs objectives. 

 

 

   

[jw1739]

37 minutes ago, AXIOM said:

Wasn't WJ brought in for this exact reason? Too change the culture, motivation within the playing group? The issue you see Niko what do you think is the problem? 

The way I would put it is that what we (the fans) expect the principal objectives of the club should be - i.e. winning matches and trophies - are not necessarily aligned with the overall objectives that CFG has set in its ownership of the club.

For example, it could be suggested that as soon as a Melbourne City player looks as though he can go to another level (Mooy, Arzani) he will be bought by Manchester City and then loaned out and ultimately on-sold to another club to bring a financial gain to CFG. That objective takes precedence over our local objective of winning the league and going into Asia because it means our best players are likely to be siphoned off in that way.

 

[Torn Asunder]

I think that CFG have realised that they can't work under a highly restrictive salary cap AND in a league with a whole bunch of (stupid) restrictions.  This ultimately gives them an excuse in their own minds for being unsuccessful (as judged by the CFG head office), which limits the consequences of failure.

Ask yourself, if you were being held back from winning, would you care as much about losing? 

Seemingly they have tried to copy some of the things the more successful A-League clubs have done as a template for potential success, but to me its been halfhearted.  For example, when we hear how our new French player is like Ninkovic, is that good messaging from the club, or does it show that we are only trying to be as good as someone else (or should we be aiming for the best)?  I hate these references to other A-League clubs as either benchmarks, or excuses.  We should be setting the standard.

Based on our previous ability for meek capitulation, we know CFG have run a review process on the culture of the club, and made statements of intent, and implemented changes.  But in terms of our on field success, the fatal error is the poor recruiting of visas, and inexperienced coaches.  The other successful clubs tend to get this right, but we tend to get it horribly wrong.  And once these mistakes are made at the start of the season, the salary cap and other restrictions make it almost impossible to correct.

This is why CFG is playing the long game.  They truly know that the only way they can build sustained success here is for the control of the league to be taken away from the muppets at FFA.  They want a league to exist that can produce genuine Asian Champion League quality teams, who can compete in Asia year in year out.

[n i k o]

2 minutes ago, Torn Asunder said:

I think that CFG have realised that they can't work under a highly restrictive salary cap AND in a league with a whole bunch of (stupid) restrictions.  This ultimately gives them an excuse in their own minds for being unsuccessful (as judged by the CFG head office), which limits the consequences of failure.

Sydney seems to have managed it fine. Victory seems to have managed it fine. This is a cop out IMO. No excuses for me regarding this as they can aim 100% for success whilst trying to implement league change. 

Ask yourself, if you were being held back from winning, would you care as much about losing? 

If my only goal was to win then I would care completely about losing. But CFG has different agendas so losing isn't the only parameter they measure themselves on. Again, it hasnt stopped other clubs from aiming for success and nothing less. 

Seemingly they have tried to copy some of the things the more successful A-League clubs have done as a template for potential success, but to me its been halfhearted.  For example, when we hear how our new French player is like Ninkovic, is that good messaging from the club, or does it show that we are only trying to be as good as someone else (or should we be aiming for the best)?  I hate these references to other A-League clubs as either benchmarks, or excuses.  We should be setting the standard.

Based on our previous ability for meek capitulation, we know CFG have run a review process on the culture of the club, and made statements of intent, and implemented changes.  But in terms of our on field success, the fatal error is the poor recruiting of visas, and inexperienced coaches.  The other successful clubs tend to get this right, but we tend to get it horribly wrong.  And once these mistakes are made at the start of the season, the salary cap and other restrictions make it almost impossible to correct.

This is why CFG is playing the long game.  They truly know that the only way they can build sustained success here is for the control of the league to be taken away from the muppets at FFA.  They want a league to exist that can produce genuine Asian Champion League quality teams, who can compete in Asia year in year out.

Lets say you are right. CFG is playing the long game. What is the most obvious flaw in this? That they are willing to put their objectives in front of their supporters. Good luck sustaining this product over the long term if this is their mentality. 

Ive added my responses in your post. And your post highlights further inconclusive evidence that its management at the top level that is the cause of our lack of success. 

[AXIOM]

I think we really need to let the season pan out before we throw out the baby with the bath water. In saying this we were all 95% happy with the squad this season and the perceived depth we have all the way down to the youth, but last weeks game through a spanner in the works. Lets see this week if there are any changes to the squad and how we perform. If we dont come out and dominate WF then the shit will hit the fan. I too am not sure but know one thing....The fish rots from the head first.

[jw1739]

1 hour ago, Torn Asunder said:

I think that CFG have realised that they can't work under a highly restrictive salary cap AND in a league with a whole bunch of (stupid) restrictions.  This ultimately gives them an excuse in their own minds for being unsuccessful (as judged by the CFG head office), which limits the consequences of failure.

Ask yourself, if you were being held back from winning, would you care as much about losing? 

Seemingly they have tried to copy some of the things the more successful A-League clubs have done as a template for potential success, but to me its been halfhearted.  For example, when we hear how our new French player is like Ninkovic, is that good messaging from the club, or does it show that we are only trying to be as good as someone else (or should we be aiming for the best)?  I hate these references to other A-League clubs as either benchmarks, or excuses.  We should be setting the standard.

Based on our previous ability for meek capitulation, we know CFG have run a review process on the culture of the club, and made statements of intent, and implemented changes.  But in terms of our on field success, the fatal error is the poor recruiting of visas, and inexperienced coaches.  The other successful clubs tend to get this right, but we tend to get it horribly wrong.  And once these mistakes are made at the start of the season, the salary cap and other restrictions make it almost impossible to correct.

This is why CFG is playing the long game.  They truly know that the only way they can build sustained success here is for the control of the league to be taken away from the muppets at FFA.  They want a league to exist that can produce genuine Asian Champion League quality teams, who can compete in Asia year in year out.

I'm afraid that the excuse of the restrictions of the salary cap and various rules on players and clubs is beginning to wear thin with me, and IMO it is a total cop out.

These restrictions and rules have not stopped Victory, Sydney, Central Coast, Adelaide, Brisbane and Western Sydney from all being Premiers and the same 6 clubs plus Newcastle from all being runners -up (i.e. finishing second in the regular season). Neither have those restrictions and rules prevented those seven clubs from being Champions or Runners-up or both, and Perth From being Runners-Up (i.e. Grand Final losing team).

[Torn Asunder]

I'm not saying that its right or in the best interest of our current supporters to play the long game and blame the salary cap and other restrictions for the lack of success, but this excuse is a logical fall back position when success does not eventuate.  Although this position is not put out there publicly by CFG, I offer it up as a reason as to why we have not been able to obtain the ultimate success.

Should we faithful supporters be annoyed by this.  Yes, I am.  I'd love to see more genuine quality in our squad, and under the helm of a proven manager.  We should be title contenders, every season, but we're not, and this season looks like a tough one.  We'll probably make the finals, we may even sneak into Asia, but its clear that other clubs look better than us thus far.

CFG have said they will only invest in Melbourne, commensurate to return.  They have said that if other revenue streams were open to them, they would invest in better players.  They have tried bringing in loan players and early on they started signing players to Manchester City and loaning them back, but they've always copped restrictions on these activities.

The clubs that have been successful are seemingly more motivated to get the best out of the current situation because the current situation fits better with their parameters of operation.

CFG is big fish in a small pond.  They will do better when the pond is opened up and they can operate freely.  They know this.

In my mind, they are ultimately banking on becoming a powerhouse in Asia, and then growing their support.  They probably see little risk in this taking time, as the A-League is still in its infancy in terms of levels of support and credibility, and supporter growth in the league is a very very slow churn.  CFG know they've got time, and they've never been in a hurry to get to where they want to go.

Edited November 7, 2018 by Torn Asunder

[NewConvert]

This does not make sense and none of the assumed CFG objectives are in contradiction. Lets start with the assumption that CFG wants to spot youth talent that it can on sell for a profit. It would make more sense that youth players develop in an environment that is positive with a winning mentality where losing really hurts, so why would CFG have a team where "if we win, if we lose we lose" mentality? They will lose their investment.

Commensurate spending is a sensible position to have. However the training facilities was a big ticket item. In terms of marquee expenditure there is no point of bringing in a "massive name" if the rest of the team are not able to capitalise. And as it has been noted elsewhere most marquees tend to flop in the A-League. Where I think that CFG are falling down is that their scouts are more attuned to European needs rather than Australian needs (or even Japanese needs). Where Sydney and Victory have been able to get things right is finding players that are willing to come to teh A-League and have been capable of performing.

Since I started following Heart/City I have noticed that the gaffer is critical to a team's success. Far more than in the AFL. And it is here that this club has not been successful. JVS, Aloisi, Valkanis and now Joyce have not been able to motivate, develop players or a game plan that is suitable. It has been a constant thorn but playing players out of position seems mandatory to be able to coach this club.

[haz]

4 hours ago, Torn Asunder said:

Based on our previous ability for meek capitulation, we know CFG have run a review process on the culture of the club, and made statements of intent, and implemented changes.  But in terms of our on field success, the fatal error is the poor recruiting of visas, and inexperienced coaches.  The other successful clubs tend to get this right, but we tend to get it horribly wrong.  And once these mistakes are made at the start of the season, the salary cap and other restrictions make it almost impossible to correct.

I think it is a misconception that we sign dud VISA players. In comparison to other clubs, I think we have had some of the best success.

It is the injuries that blur the view. Which imo is not a player issue, but a training/management issue.

[haz]

23 minutes ago, NewConvert said:

Since I started following Heart/City I have noticed that the gaffer is critical to a team's success. Far more than in the AFL. And it is here that this club has not been successful. JVS, Aloisi, Valkanis and now Joyce have not been able to motivate, develop players or a game plan that is suitable. It has been a constant thorn but playing players out of position seems mandatory to be able to coach this club.

I think management has got the view that since it is a salary cap league with a small squad size, being able to have flexible players is a positive.

If you sign 11 players that fit perfectly into a formation, they will proberly win and be succesfull, just look at Sydney. This is of course a good thing. But unlike Sydney, what happens if some players get injured? Our club has a horrible history of injuries (a whole other can of worms), so imagine if we signed 11 specialized players, and as usual 2 VISA players are injured for 3 months and another few players pick up injuries. We would be more screwed more then we are now!

But I think CFG/Melbourne City are over thinking it. They probaly have boffins in Manchester who did all the statistic and prediction analysis and thought "There is a much lesser chance of our game plan being disrupted if we sign players who are flexible, while not moving away from the CFG Style".

[playmaker]

Just getting back to basics;

do you think it would make a huge difference to our club if we won both trophies and did well in Asia?

I do.

Hence, the primary objective is clear.