Jump to content


Photo

Update From Sfa Regrding Team Gb


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Caberfeidh

Caberfeidh
  • Member
  • 71 posts

Posted 15 June 2012 - 10:47 AM

Just received this via LA:


The text below has been produced by Jim Brown, who is the ATAC SFA Liaison rep and is his summary of a recent email exchange he had with Daryll Broadfoot, the SFA’s Head of Communications.

The SFA have a deliberate strategy of trying not to get involved with the media on this issue and are trying to work behind the scenes. Hopefully this gives some context and background in the light of recent press speculation, particularly where Jordan Rhodes and Barry Bannan are concerned.

Hopefully its all fairly self explanatory.

Cheers
Craig



“Following comments from Huddersfield Town regarding the inclusion of Jordan Rhodes' in the 35 man squad for TeamGB at The Olympics (it has still to be whittled down to 18) I (in my ATAC role) contacted Darryl Broadfoot, Head of Communications at the SFA regarding both this and recent comments re Barry Bannan.



Below is a summary of the responses from DB -





DB confirmed that Jordan Rhodes has been spoken to as part of the under-21 group. DB also advised that the players also received an email outlining the points. Billy Stark has also had a word and Craig Levein will also speak to him in advance of any 18-man inclusion to reiterate his place in the WCQ squad. DB stated, as he has on previous occasions, that putting a gun to his head is not the correct strategy. DB also suggested that a piece which appeared in The Sun was probably not a bad thing, given it has allowed him (Jordan Rhodes) to see the depth of feeling from the Scots supporters.

As for Barry Bannan, DB stated he (Bannan) was a little embarrassed by the episode. It would appear that he is friendly with an Express journalist and, prior to flying out to the US, was asked about Team GB. He said he hadn't decided etc DB said that BB had strayed from what the players had been advised, which was what he has told us before - Don't get involved when there is no decision to be made and said he would MAYBE speak to Craig in the USA. He didn't and, on his return from the trip, was given another call to see if he had spoken to Craig Levein. In saying he hadn't he was then drawn in. DB advised that he has spoken again to BB and said that whilst trying to be polite and helpful to the journalist his comments had backfired on him when there was no decision to be taken. DB stated that he believed following the reports that BB would have had a clear view on the supporters position via his Twitter account.

Interestingly, DB stated that Craig Mackail-Smith has acted in exactly the manner they (the SFA) had asked and confirmed in the States that he had removed his name from the list.

DB believes that there is a secondary issue with Rhodes due to his club actively seeking to hoist his profile (and value). DB asked that I assure members that he (Rhodes) has been advised of the SFA position, the reasons for that position and the views of the supporters.

Given the number of players the Welsh FA are resigned to having take part, DB believes that to have one member of the group left for consideration is a sign of the work they have undertaken behind the scenes.”

SCOTTISH by birth,
British by law,
HIGHLANDER by the grace of God!

#2 PASTA Mick

PASTA Mick
  • Member
  • 12,806 posts

Posted 15 June 2012 - 10:59 AM

Good to see.

If no Scots take part, I think the SFA have to take some credit.

PASTA (Preston and Surroundings Tartan Army)
www.yesscotland.net


#3 Cohiba_Bear

Cohiba_Bear
  • Member
  • 1,185 posts

Posted 15 June 2012 - 12:05 PM

Thanks for the update. V interesting. Huddersfield pushing it fits with my assumptions on this. For all that we've been getting wound up as your post says the fact Rhodes is the only serious possible player to be involved in this push does reflect well on the SFA

#4 Rich NATA

Rich NATA
  • Member
  • 1,605 posts

Posted 15 June 2012 - 12:36 PM

If no Scots take part, I think the SFA have to take some credit.

Indeed.

And then if FIFA try anything further down the line, we can hold our heads up and emphatically tell them we had F*ck all to do with the mongrel team in 2012...
Although I do worry about other Scottish players who aren't involved with the national team (i.e. Fletcher) and who might want to cause a stir.

The Huddersfield bit is interesting, although I cannot for the life of me see as to why having Team GB on your CV would make impressive reading.
Can you imagine highlighing your Team GB involvement to any half decent manager?
Player: "I was selected by Team GB in 2012"
Alex Ferguson: "So what?"

#5 big_matt

big_matt
  • Member
  • 2,864 posts

Posted 15 June 2012 - 12:55 PM

Indeed.

And then if FIFA try anything further down the line, we can hold our heads up and emphatically tell them we had F*ck all to do with the mongrel team in 2012...
Although I do worry about other Scottish players who aren't involved with the national team (i.e. Fletcher) and who might want to cause a stir.

The Huddersfield bit is interesting, although I cannot for the life of me see as to why having Team GB on your CV would make impressive reading.
Can you imagine highlighing your Team GB involvement to any half decent manager?
Player: "I was selected by Team GB in 2012"
Alex Ferguson: "So what?"


Being selected for team GB would make you one of the eight best under 23 players in the UK. I'd say that would be a positive thing to have on your cv. It also means you'll have managers and scouts watching you (especially from other countries) that haven't been to Huddersfield.

As for us not having players in the squad (if it turns out like that), then I'd commend the SFA on a job well done. However, would it make any difference? If FIFA decided in 8 years time that extra African places were needed and that GB would be one team, would the fact that we kept players out an Olympic side in the past make any difference? I'm not sure.

#6 jock strap

jock strap
  • Member
  • 8,169 posts

Posted 15 June 2012 - 01:01 PM

Good.

hope none make the last 18.

hope team GB gets whalloped in every game.
Wallace : why am I a traitor when I swear no allegiance to eng**nd ?

#7 aaid

aaid
  • Member
  • 3,004 posts

Posted 15 June 2012 - 01:07 PM

Being selected for team GB would make you one of the eight best under 23 players in the UK.


Apart from England players currently in Ukraine and those players who's clubs have already vetoed their inclusion. That said, a player from Huddersfield playing well would undoubtedly increase their profile and possibly cost but I'd imagine any clubs interested in making a move for Jordan Rhodes are already well aware of his abiities.


As for us not having players in the squad (if it turns out like that), then I'd commend the SFA on a job well done. However, would it make any difference? If FIFA decided in 8 years time that extra African places were needed and that GB would be one team, would the fact that we kept players out an Olympic side in the past make any difference? I'm not sure.


The only defence we have is that we are an independent footballing nation the same way as all the other FIFA members. The other FIFA nations are unlikely to vote for an expulsion of a member nation as it sets a dangerous precedent. However by getting involved in the Olympics as a Team GB it opens that door. Is the competing in the Olympics, when there has never been any interest before, worth taking that risk. I don't think so.

BTW, this email is the entire text that Broon2 is referencing in the Huddersfield thread. I know this to be true as I am the Craig referred to above.
The owls are not what they seem

#8 weekevie04

weekevie04
  • Member
  • 2,738 posts

Posted 15 June 2012 - 01:25 PM

Just received this via LA:



Given the number of players the Welsh FA are resigned to having take part, DB believes that to have one member of the group left for consideration is a sign of the work they have undertaken behind the scenes.”


Or not the lack of quality we have coming through or established in Scotland?

#9 George Saint

George Saint
  • Member
  • 720 posts

Posted 15 June 2012 - 02:33 PM

In an 18 man squad, I would expect there to be at least 3 or 4 Scots.

In Roy we trust


#10 jock strap

jock strap
  • Member
  • 8,169 posts

Posted 15 June 2012 - 02:37 PM

In an 18 man squad, I would expect there to be at least 3 or 4 Scots.


your mental

like who ?
Wallace : why am I a traitor when I swear no allegiance to eng**nd ?

#11 DeeRus

DeeRus
  • Member
  • 1,620 posts

Posted 15 June 2012 - 02:57 PM

Good to know we're not fighting the battle on our own.

However .............least we forget the comments Berra made, whilst on international duty, at a SCOTLAND press conference


Sorry but it doesn't quite add up for me and I'm still of the opinion that the SFA have been far too weak and should have made it very clear - you make yourself available (whether picked or not0 and you then make yourself unavailable to be picked by Scotland.


I accept it may be severe but then again, so its the potential future implications for the Scottish national team

http://www.tasunshineappeal.co.uk/    #RoadToDortmund


#12 George Saint

George Saint
  • Member
  • 720 posts

Posted 15 June 2012 - 03:04 PM

your mental

like who ?


Whoever your good, under 23 years old, players are. There must be some.

In Roy we trust


#13 PASTA Mick

PASTA Mick
  • Member
  • 12,806 posts

Posted 15 June 2012 - 03:12 PM

your mental

like who ?


I think he meant if players were being picked on merit and other factors weren't being considered. We have players good enough, we just don't want them to be selected.

PASTA (Preston and Surroundings Tartan Army)
www.yesscotland.net