The South African DOMESTIC LEAGUE Provides a Foundation

[General Trousers]

The South African DOMESTIC LEAGUE Provides a Foundation - We all know that the South African League has provided a structure for their National Team. Today we saw what cohesion can do. Our parade of football mercenaries and pirates were routed on the home front. An embarrassing disgrace for us.

All the Mammy Water, Trumpet blaring supporters, and title carrying foreign based players could do nothing against the South Africans.

<

[mystic]

There is merit in what you say, but on the other hand what has South Africa actually achieved in football even with the strength of their league? Bottom line is that our team didn't stick together when the going got tough. We lost our composure and didn't show the character that Nigerian teams are known for. We were also outcoached.

[airwolex]

There is merit in what you say, but on the other hand what has South Africa actually achieved in football even with the strength of their league? Bottom line is that our team didn't stick together when the going got tough. We lost our composure and didn't show the character that Nigerian teams are known for. We were also outcoached.

Exactly what I was thinking. They have under achieved for years.

[Comrade Machel]

There is merit in what you say, but on the other hand what has South Africa actually achieved in football even with the strength of their league? Bottom line is that our team didn't stick together when the going got tough. We lost our composure and didn't show the character that Nigerian teams are known for. We were also outcoached.

They have won Afton like you guys and been to the world cup like you guys There are many factors here but its undeniable the strength of their league helps them. Imagine if we had 5 black African countries with a strong league like south African league. Imagine what it would do for creating a truly unique african football identity. South Africans might underachieve but one thing you can't deny is their national team always plays football a certain unique way. Good control little tricks etc whereas for others its a mix of African and European styles due to different mentalities of the players

[Enugu II]

There is merit in what you say, but on the other hand what has South Africa actually achieved in football even with the strength of their league? Bottom line is that our team didn't stick together when the going got tough. We lost our composure and didn't show the character that Nigerian teams are known for. We were also outcoached.

Exactly what I was thinking. They have under achieved for years.

I do not know that I would state that they have underachieved. In fact, the contrary is more correct. They have achieved a lot!! This time came out of apartheid and found that they were no match for the powers of African soccer. However, since then they have grown by leaps and bounds. Not only have they won the AFCON, they are current African Champions League king and had previously emerged finalists in the old African Champions Clubs Cup (?). They have also been to multiple World Cups.

[folem]

There is merit in what you say next t on the other hand what has South is frica actually achieved in football even with the strength of their league? Bottom line is that our team didn't stick together when the going got toudespitest our composure Sundown n't show the character that Nigerian teams are known for. We were also outcoached.

Exactly what I was thinking. They have under achieved for years.

I do not know that I would state that they have underachieved. In fact, the contrary is more correct. They have achieved a lot!! This time came out of apartheid and found that they were no match for the powers of African soccer. However, since then they have grown by leaps and bounds. Not only have they won the AFCON, they are current African Champions League king and had previously emerged finalists in the old African Champions Clubs Cup (?). They have also been to multiple World Cups.

Given the resources and infrastructure available in SA football, their underachievement is clear for all to see. SA league cannot compete favourably with the North Africans. They may have won CAN once, but its been downhill ever since and they may yet miss out of qualifying despite the good start. Sundowns won CAFCL despite being eliminated twice during the season. Pirates won Champions cup once too. SA were the first WC hosts to fail to get past the group stage and have never reached KO stage in their history of participating.

[Enugu II]

There is merit in what you say next t on the other hand what has South is frica actually achieved in football even with the strength of their league? Bottom line is that our team didn't stick together when the going got toudespitest our composure Sundown n't show the character that Nigerian teams are known for. We were also outcoached.

Exactly what I was thinking. They have under achieved for years.

I do not know that I would state that they have underachieved. In fact, the contrary is more correct. They have achieved a lot!! This time came out of apartheid and found that they were no match for the powers of African soccer. However, since then they have grown by leaps and bounds. Not only have they won the AFCON, they are current African Champions League king and had previously emerged finalists in the old African Champions Clubs Cup (?). They have also been to multiple World Cups.

Given the resources and infrastructure available in SA football, their underachievement is clear for all to see. SA league cannot compete favourably with the North Africans. They may have won CAN once, but its been downhill ever since and they may yet miss out of qualifying despite the good start. Sundowns won CAFCL despite being eliminated twice during the season. Pirates won Champions cup once too. SA were the first WC hosts to fail to get past the group stage and have never reached KO stage in their history of participating.

Going by what you listed above, it is surprising to call that underachievement. This country was clearly not mentioned among the elite in Africa at independence barely two decades ago and today they are definitely among the top 10 in the continent. If that is underachievement, then we ought to rewrite the meaning of that word. Not getting past the group stage of the WC for an African country is not an underachievement when compared to their African peers. The test is qualifying for the event itself i.e. finishing among the top five in the continent at the national level. Further, despite a shorter time among Africa's elite its league champion has won exactly the same number of African champion clubs' titles as Nigeria. Yet, we should define them as underachieving? Bros, its achievement is based on where it was barely two decades or so ago.

[folem]

There is merit in what you say next t on the other hand what has South is frica actually achieved in football even with the strength of their league? Bottom line is that our team didn't stick together when the going got toudespitest our composure Sundown n't show the character that Nigerian teams are known for. We were also outcoached.

Exactly what I was thinking. They have under achieved for years.

I do not know that I would state that they have underachieved. In fact, the contrary is more correct. They have achieved a lot!! This time came out of apartheid and found that they were no match for the powers of African soccer. However, since then they have grown by leaps and bounds. Not only have they won the AFCON, they are current African Champions League king and had previously emerged finalists in the old African Champions Clubs Cup (?). They have also been to multiple World Cups.

Given the resources and infrastructure available in SA football, their underachievement is clear for all to see. SA league cannot compete favourably with the North Africans. They may have won CAN once, but its been downhill ever since and they may yet miss out of qualifying despite the good start. Sundowns won CAFCL despite being eliminated twice during the season. Pirates won Champions cup once too. SA were the first WC hosts to fail to get past the group stage and have never reached KO stage in their history of participating.

Going by what you listed above, it is surprising to call that underachievement. This country was clearly not mentioned among the elite in Africa at independence barely two decades ago and today they are definitely among the top 10 in the continent. If that is underachievement, then we ought to rewrite the meaning of that word. Not getting past the group stage of the WC for an African country is not an underachievement when compared to their African peers. The test is qualifying for the event itself i.e. finishing among the top five in the continent at the national level. Further, despite a shorter time among Africa's elite its league champion has won exactly the same number of African champion clubs' titles as Nigeria. Yet, we should define them as underachieving? Bros, its achievement is based on where it was barely two decades or so ago.

SA had its independence in 1931 and was one of the four founding fathers of CAF in 1957. SA is currently ranked at 12 in Africa. SA has failed to qualify for three of the last five CAN and only played in one as host nation.

[Enugu II]

There is merit in what you say next t on the other hand what has South is frica actually achieved in football even with the strength of their league? Bottom line is that our team didn't stick together when the going got toudespitest our composure Sundown n't show the character that Nigerian teams are known for. We were also outcoached.

Exactly what I was thinking. They have under achieved for years.

I do not know that I would state that they have underachieved. In fact, the contrary is more correct. They have achieved a lot!! This time came out of apartheid and found that they were no match for the powers of African soccer. However, since then they have grown by leaps and bounds. Not only have they won the AFCON, they are current African Champions League king and had previously emerged finalists in the old African Champions Clubs Cup (?). They have also been to multiple World Cups.

Given the resources and infrastructure available in SA football, their underachievement is clear for all to see. SA league cannot compete favourably with the North Africans. They may have won CAN once, but its been downhill ever since and they may yet miss out of qualifying despite the good start. Sundowns won CAFCL despite being eliminated twice during the season. Pirates won Champions cup once too. SA were the first WC hosts to fail to get past the group stage and have never reached KO stage in their history of participating.

Going by what you listed above, it is surprising to call that underachievement. This country was clearly not mentioned among the elite in Africa at independence barely two decades ago and today they are definitely among the top 10 in the continent. If that is underachievement, then we ought to rewrite the meaning of that word. Not getting past the group stage of the WC for an African country is not an underachievement when compared to their African peers. The test is qualifying for the event itself i.e. finishing among the top five in the continent at the national level. Further, despite a shorter time among Africa's elite its league champion has won exactly the same number of African champion clubs' titles as Nigeria. Yet, we should define them as underachieving? Bros, its achievement is based on where it was barely two decades or so ago.

SA had its independence in 1931 and was one of the four founding fathers of CAF. SA is currently ranked at 12 in Africa. SA has failed to qualify for

Actually, I was referring to end of apartheid and not independence. Under apartheid, they were isolated and were not competitive. Coming out apartheid, its teams were absolutely poor and they have improved tremendously since then. That should not be a thing to sniff at. You crack me up with failing to qualify for three of last AFCON. How many did Egypt fail to qualify for again? How about Nigeria? Obviously that criteria should suggest for us on whether Egypt and Nigeria have also underachieved, should it not?

[folem]

Actually, I was referring to end of apartheid and not independence. Under apartheid, they were isolated and were not competitive. Coming out apartheid, its teams were absolutely poor and they have improved tremendously since then. That should not be a thing to sniff at. You crack me up with failing to qualify for three of last AFCON. How many did Egypt fail to qualify for again? How about Nigeria? Obviously that criteria should suggest for us on whether Egypt and Nigeria have also underachieved, should it not?

You can as well say they are underachieving. Coming out of apartheid SA beat Cameroon still savouring it's exploits at 1990 WC. Nigeria youth teams are performing well and seniors won CAN in 2013. SA football has been in free fall since CAN 2004..

[YUJAM]

I am with GT on this one. No team without a solid, well organized league has made it past the QF of the WC. IMO this is the issue that holds African footie back ref most.

[folem]

I am with GT on this one. No team without a solid, well organized league has made it past the QF of the WC. IMO this is the issue that holds African footie back ref most.

What has SA league done to help Bafana performance at WC? Are there no such leagues mentioned in Africa or Croatia, Bulgaria?

[Enugu II]

Actually, I was referring to end of apartheid and not independence. Under apartheid, they were isolated and were not competitive. Coming out apartheid, its teams were absolutely poor and they have improved tremendously since then. That should not be a thing to sniff at. You crack me up with failing to qualify for three of last AFCON. How many did Egypt fail to qualify for again? How about Nigeria? Obviously that criteria should suggest for us on whether Egypt and Nigeria have also underachieved, should it not?

You can as well say they are underachieving. Coming out of apartheid SA beat Cameroon still savouring it's exploits at 1990 WC. Nigeria youth teams are performing well and seniors won CAN in 2013. SA football has been in free fall since CAN 2004..

folem,

First, I have not argued that Nigerias is underachieving and thus that line of argument is irrelevant. I see that the date of underachievement has now been changed from 2004. Do we assume that they were overachieving before 2004? LOL.

On the issue of South Africa underachieving, you have to provide support for your claim and not simply make a claim without relevant support. Here is why South Africa is not underachieving and I am referring from end of apartheid when they rejoined CAF activities. I will not abide by your attempt to circumscribe the period to 2004 and after.

1. Twice their clubs became champions of Africa -- Pirates and Sundowns. Currently, South African club (Sundowns) is the champion of Africa and they play in the SAPL. A direct link to the local league.

2. South Africa has been to the World Cup three times. That is more times than Egypt that has been playing in WC qualifiers far more times!! Moreover, Egypt has the claim as the best league in Africa. BTW, the likes of Egypt, Tunisia, and Ivory Coast have not done better than South Africa at the World Cup!

3. South Africa won the AFCON in 1996 and finished third in 2000. Yet, they had been eligible to participate in qualifiers only in 1994!

The above does not appear to be underachieving by any metric that you may choose to use. BTW, players from that local league which you want us to believe is underachieving have just beaten mighty Nigeria with foreign -based players in Uyo, Nigeria.

[Kabalega]

SA this, S. Africa that.....

At the end of the day, Nigeria found its level.

FIFA rankings be damned!

[folem]

Actually, I was referring to end of apartheid and not independence. Under apartheid, they were isolated and were not competitive. Coming out apartheid, its teams were absolutely poor and they have improved tremendously since then. That should not be a thing to sniff at. You crack me up with failing to qualify for three of last AFCON. How many did Egypt fail to qualify for again? How about Nigeria? Obviously that criteria should suggest for us on whether Egypt and Nigeria have also underachieved, should it not?

You can as well say they are underachieving. Coming out of apartheid SA beat Cameroon still savouring it's exploits at 1990 WC. Nigeria youth teams are performing well and seniors won CAN in 2013. SA football has been in free fall since CAN 2004..

folem,

First, I have not argued that Nigerias is underachieving and thus that line of argument is irrelevant. I see that the date of underachievement has now been changed from 2004. Do we assume that they were overachieving before 2004? LOL.

On the issue of South Africa underachieving, you have to provide support for your claim and not simply make a claim without relevant support. Here is why South Africa is not underachieving and I am referring from end of apartheid when they rejoined CAF activities. I will not abide by your attempt to circumscribe the period to 2004 and after.

1. Twice their clubs became champions of Africa -- Pirates and Sundowns. Currently, South African club (Sundowns) is the champion of Africa and they play in the SAPL. A direct link to the local league.

2. South Africa has been to the World Cup three times. That is more times than Egypt that has been playing in WC qualifiers far more times!! Moreover, Egypt has the claim as the best league in Africa. BTW, the likes of Egypt, Tunisia, and Ivory Coast have not done better than South Africa at the World Cup!

3. South Africa won the AFCON in 1996 and finished third in 2000. Yet, they had been eligible to participate in qualifiers only in 1994!

The above does not appear to be underachieving by any metric that you may choose to use. BTW, players from that local league which you want us to believe is underachieving have just beaten mighty Nigeria with foreign -based players in Uyo, Nigeria.

The 2004 date was put to show that comparing SA failures to Nigeria recent failures is not exactly the same.

[ohenhen1]

For the millionth of time.

We must develop the Nigerian league.

Our people like shortcuts.

No country has won the world cup without a strong league.


Foreign base vs Local base.

[mastermind 17]

For the millionth of time.

We must develop the Nigerian league.

Our people like shortcuts.

No country has won the world cup without a strong league.


Foreign base vs Local base.

Can not argue with the statement in bold. The current RSA team is made mostly of players from Sundowns (7) even though three of them now play oversees

That team is the team that also made it to the Olympics when Nigeria failed to qualify. There is a lot of experience in that team, even though Khune at 28 is the Oldest

[YUJAM]

S Africa can always field a team exclusively from their league that can compete with anyone in Africa. Ditto for Egypt and Tunisia. Even 2nd tier footballing nations such as Costa Rica, Mexico, Croatia, Colombia, Uruguay, Ecuador, Japan and others have decent and organized leagues that provide that foundation for their players and this is reflected in the fact that all of them can call up locals and form a decent NT.

For me, the local league is where players develop a solid foundation and develop a football identity that helps them pay cohesive football with other players from their leagues in a NT for example. Of course, countries develop this identity to varying levels. Countries such as Argentina, Holland, Brazil, Spain, Italy and Netherlands have developed this identity very successfully which is evidenced in the way they play. They have a specific style of play that any soccer fan can identify. These nations are greatly helped by the fact that their players identify with styles that were honed in their youth systems and local leagues and because of this developing cohesion in a NT is not difficult. To achieve this type of cohesion, one has to build a successful youth program that is tied to the local league teams, in effect helping provide a pipeline of youth talent to the teams. Second, the league has to be well organized and successful enough to retain the kind of talent that helps maintain the quality of the league. African nations cannot afford to have players taking off to obscure locations because it affects the quality of our leagues. But one cannot control this phenomenon until our leagues are good enough to retain talent.

Anyway, I still hold that nations that do not have adequately developed leagues will continue to under-perform at the international level. You can slap a bunch of superstars from Europe together to form an 11 and declare that theoretically they are world beaters. But unless they have solid soccer fundamentals that emanate from a solid home based league, they will more times than not be found out by nations such as Mexico that have this type of foundation for their footballers.

The idea that we continue to depend on European nations to develop our players for us is simply 'a$$ backwards' IMO

I am with GT on this one. No team without a solid, well organized league has made it past the QF of the WC. IMO this is the issue that holds African footie back ref most.

What has SA league done to help Bafana performance at WC? Are there no such leagues mentioned in Africa or Croatia, Bulgaria?

[Kabalega]

S Africa can always field a team exclusively from their league that can compete with anyone in Africa. Ditto for Egypt and Tunisia. Even 2nd tier footballing nations such as Costa Rica, Mexico, Croatia, Colombia, Uruguay, Ecuador, Japan and others have decent and organized leagues that provide that foundation for their players and this is reflected in the fact that all of them can call up locals and form a decent NT.

For me, the local league is where players develop a solid foundation and develop a football identity that helps them pay cohesive football with other players from their leagues in a NT for example. Of course, countries develop this identity to varying levels. Countries such as Argentina, Holland, Brazil, Spain, Italy and Netherlands have developed this identity very successfully which is evidenced in the way they play. They have a specific style of play that any soccer fan can identify. These nations are greatly helped by the fact that their players identify with styles that were honed in their youth systems and local leagues and because of this developing cohesion in a NT is not difficult. To achieve this type of cohesion, one has to build a successful youth program that is tied to the local league teams, in effect helping provide a pipeline of youth talent to the teams. Second, the league has to be well organized and successful enough to retain the kind of talent that helps maintain the quality of the league. African nations cannot afford to have players taking off to obscure locations because it affects the quality of our leagues. But one cannot control this phenomenon until our leagues are good enough to retain talent.

Anyway, I still hold that nations that do not have adequately developed leagues will continue to under-perform at the international level. You can slap a bunch of superstars from Europe together to form an 11 and declare that theoretically they are world beaters. But unless they have solid soccer fundamentals that emanate from a solid home based league, they will more times than not be found out by nations such as Mexico that have this type of foundation for their footballers.

The idea that we continue to depend on European nations to develop our players for us is simply 'a$$ backwards' IMO

I am with GT on this one. No team without a solid, well organized league has made it past the QF of the WC. IMO this is the issue that holds African footie back ref most.

What has SA league done to help Bafana performance at WC? Are there no such leagues mentioned in Africa or Croatia, Bulgaria?

KPOM!

Uganda Cranes are now riding on the coattails of KCCA players.
Later it will be CHAN players and then everybody else for the 1 month before Russia 2018 and Cameroon 2019.

[YUJAM]

KCCA may make the QFs of the Confed Cp now that CAF has expanded the group stage to sixteen teams

How many players from KCCA start for the Cranes?

S Africa can always field a team exclusively from their league that can compete with anyone in Africa. Ditto for Egypt and Tunisia. Even 2nd tier footballing nations such as Costa Rica, Mexico, Croatia, Colombia, Uruguay, Ecuador, Japan and others have decent and organized leagues that provide that foundation for their players and this is reflected in the fact that all of them can call up locals and form a decent NT.

For me, the local league is where players develop a solid foundation and develop a football identity that helps them pay cohesive football with other players from their leagues in a NT for example. Of course, countries develop this identity to varying levels. Countries such as Argentina, Holland, Brazil, Spain, Italy and Netherlands have developed this identity very successfully which is evidenced in the way they play. They have a specific style of play that any soccer fan can identify. These nations are greatly helped by the fact that their players identify with styles that were honed in their youth systems and local leagues and because of this developing cohesion in a NT is not difficult. To achieve this type of cohesion, one has to build a successful youth program that is tied to the local league teams, in effect helping provide a pipeline of youth talent to the teams. Second, the league has to be well organized and successful enough to retain the kind of talent that helps maintain the quality of the league. African nations cannot afford to have players taking off to obscure locations because it affects the quality of our leagues. But one cannot control this phenomenon until our leagues are good enough to retain talent.

Anyway, I still hold that nations that do not have adequately developed leagues will continue to under-perform at the international level. You can slap a bunch of superstars from Europe together to form an 11 and declare that theoretically they are world beaters. But unless they have solid soccer fundamentals that emanate from a solid home based league, they will more times than not be found out by nations such as Mexico that have this type of foundation for their footballers.

The idea that we continue to depend on European nations to develop our players for us is simply 'a$$ backwards' IMO

I am with GT on this one. No team without a solid, well organized league has made it past the QF of the WC. IMO this is the issue that holds African footie back ref most.

What has SA league done to help Bafana performance at WC? Are there no such leagues mentioned in Africa or Croatia, Bulgaria?

KPOM!

Uganda Cranes are now riding on the coattails of KCCA players.
Later it will be CHAN players and then everybody else for the 1 month before Russia 2018 and Cameroon 2019.

[Kabalega]

6 KCCA, players joined the Cranes before Senegal. Replacing Afcon 2017 players who are not used to the CAF landscape.
Granted the coaches are looking at CHAN and RUSSIA 2018.

KCCA may make the QFs of the Confed Cp now that CAF has expanded the group stage to sixteen teams

How many players from KCCA start for the Cranes?

S Africa can always field a team exclusively from their league that can compete with anyone in Africa. Ditto for Egypt and Tunisia. Even 2nd tier footballing nations such as Costa Rica, Mexico, Croatia, Colombia, Uruguay, Ecuador, Japan and others have decent and organized leagues that provide that foundation for their players and this is reflected in the fact that all of them can call up locals and form a decent NT.

For me, the local league is where players develop a solid foundation and develop a football identity that helps them pay cohesive football with other players from their leagues in a NT for example. Of course, countries develop this identity to varying levels. Countries such as Argentina, Holland, Brazil, Spain, Italy and Netherlands have developed this identity very successfully which is evidenced in the way they play. They have a specific style of play that any soccer fan can identify. These nations are greatly helped by the fact that their players identify with styles that were honed in their youth systems and local leagues and because of this developing cohesion in a NT is not difficult. To achieve this type of cohesion, one has to build a successful youth program that is tied to the local league teams, in effect helping provide a pipeline of youth talent to the teams. Second, the league has to be well organized and successful enough to retain the kind of talent that helps maintain the quality of the league. African nations cannot afford to have players taking off to obscure locations because it affects the quality of our leagues. But one cannot control this phenomenon until our leagues are good enough to retain talent.

Anyway, I still hold that nations that do not have adequately developed leagues will continue to under-perform at the international level. You can slap a bunch of superstars from Europe together to form an 11 and declare that theoretically they are world beaters. But unless they have solid soccer fundamentals that emanate from a solid home based league, they will more times than not be found out by nations such as Mexico that have this type of foundation for their footballers.

The idea that we continue to depend on European nations to develop our players for us is simply 'a$$ backwards' IMO

I am with GT on this one. No team without a solid, well organized league has made it past the QF of the WC. IMO this is the issue that holds African footie back ref most.

What has SA league done to help Bafana performance at WC? Are there no such leagues mentioned in Africa or Croatia, Bulgaria?

KPOM!

Uganda Cranes are now riding on the coattails of KCCA players.
Later it will be CHAN players and then everybody else for the 1 month before Russia 2018 and Cameroon 2019.

[jette1]

all narratives as to why we lost may have elements of validity but be careful to not be self-absorbed in your pseudo fancy tangents that may or may not even be remotely close to reality. In watching this match - The glaring contrast between SA & SE that cannot be missed even by Stevie wonder is that - their strike squad operated and moved forward as a Unit hence created confusion every time they came forward. SE neither had a strike squad talk less - a collaboration in attacks. SE might be needing a total overhaul. Players looked overweight and sluggish and didn't seem hungry enough for a game that crucial.

[Man Ataye]

all narratives as to why we lost may have elements of validity but be careful to not be self-absorbed in your pseudo fancy tangents that may or may not even be remotely close to reality. In watching this match - The glaring contrast between SA & SE that cannot be missed even by Stevie wonder is that - their strike squad operated and moved forward as a Unit hence created confusion every time they came forward. SE neither had a strike squad talk less - a collaboration in attacks. SE might be needing a total overhaul. Players looked overweight and sluggish and didn't seem hungry enough for a game that crucial.

Eh!!!!!!!! wow Was it that bad??????