No More Onion Bags

10 Responses to “Backup Club – Substitute For Life”

1. Chris says:

   October 12, 2008 at 6:17 pm

   “Contrarily for Solskjaer, he is considered somewhat of a hero for staying loyal to United and being happy to be a squad player.”
   …and scoring the winner in the 1999 European Cup had nothing to do with it? He did score 91 goals in 235 total appearances.

   The difference between the two players is the fact that Solskjaer did make a contribution to United whilst he was there. Bogarde, for various reasons, didn’t . To a football fans rather one-sided view of things, Bogarde is perceived a ‘thief’ for taking money for not performing, whereas the management of Chelsea were really at fault for offering the contract in the first place.

   The alternative, which I think you’re suggesting, is that Solskjaer should have taken a move elsewhere to another club. Would he be happier playing for say, Newcastle (as Nicky Butt chose)? What would he class as ‘success’ – Starting all games? Winning a trophy? Remember that Butt effectively lost his place in the England squad following the move (after being the best player in the World Cup too…according to Pele ). Another example of a bit-part player who took the risk to go elsewhere was Ray Parlour. Very little worked out for him once he moved to Middlesborough. And for less money too!

   The NFL is probably also more ruthless with bit-part players since they don’t like to offer long contracts until you are a proven asset. There can only ever be 32 starting QB’s each week and 32 backups on the sidelines, whilst each year there is a conveyor belt of new eager QB’s out of the college system. I would be surprised that many of Favre’s backups actually chose to go elsewhere.

   Reply
2. Cass says:

   October 13, 2008 at 9:01 pm

   I get your point about why he’s remembered fondly by Manchester United fans, but his goals don’t fully explain why the ambition of a perenial super sub was never questioned in the media. Compare this to Le Tissier and McManaman.

   Le Tissier was an absolute one man team for Southampton, but always had his ambition questioned for not trying to make it a bigger team. I equate the the big-fish-in-small-pond of Le Tissier with Solsjkaer’s small-fish-in-big-pond. As Roy Keane would say, both of them need to get out of their comfort zone. And remember McManaman at Real Madrid? He had a couple of fantastic seasons on the pitch and acted with dignity off the pitch as each year the politics and disneyfication of Real Madrid meant he had serious hurdles to overcome as he didn’t meet the marketing department’s strict criteria. Despite having a huge influence on Madrid and being widely respected by the fans (and eventually winning over the board/management), there were always questions raised about him in the English press. It was basically reported that he was just happy to pick up silverware and a salary while doing very little and that he was a bit of a sellout mercenary. I don’t think you could argue Solskjaer did more for United than McManaman did for Madrid so strange that he never had the same questions asked of him.

   Also, I’m not sure I get your examples of Parlour and Butt. Parlour (or the Romford Pele as he was better known) was absolutely instrumental for Arsenal for 10 years and only left when on the wane, while Butt had gone through periods where he was far more of a regular starter than Sojskjaer ever was. If you’re saying the fact that they weren’t good enough when they left and that maybe Solskjaer wouldn’t have been either, than that just makes him more of a fraud for picking up all that United silverware if his talent didn’t justify it.

   Anyway, thanks for all your comments and let me know if you ever want to write a guest post!

   Reply
3. migcampista says:

   October 13, 2008 at 10:57 pm

   Regarding Winston Bogarde, I recall this article from years ago and thought to post it for those interesting in knowing a bot more about his situation. The article is by Dutch writer Ernst Bouwes.

   “A biography of Winston Bogarde may finally shed some light over his time
   at Chelsea. Why did he come and why did not he leave? ‘Deze neger buigt
   voor niemand’ (This black man bows for no one) is written by Dutch
   free-lance journalist Marcel Rözer and seeks to answer those very
   questions.

   Unbowed: Bogarde hopes this book with set a few records straight.
   In August 2000 Winston Bogarde thought his future was in Newcastle.
   Bobby Robson was keen to take him on a free transfer from Barcelona and
   only his signature was missing from a long-term commitment. At the last
   moment however, Chelsea stepped in with an offer that doubled the one
   from Sir Bobby.
   There was no doubt in Bogarde’s mind: he would move to London. Except
   for a small Lost in Translation-moment during the medical test, when
   Bogarde insisted his knee-injury was ‘recurring’ rather than
   ‘recovering’, all parties happily agreed to a four-year contract worth a
   reported 2 million pound annually. Afterwards Bogarde met manager
   Gianluca Vialli, who told him: ‘I am so glad that you are going to help
   us!’
   Three weeks later Bogarde arrived at Stamford Bridge to gain
   match-fitness with the reserves, only to find out that Vialli was fired.
   Oh, no, here we go again, was his reaction. When Bogarde went to AC
   Milan three years before to join Patrick Kluivert and Edgar Davids, his
   dream of recreating the best days of Ajax in Serie A was shattered when
   Arrigo Sacchi got the boot before a game was played that season. In came
   Fabio Capello. Within weeks Capello had enough of the meddlesome
   Dutchmen, who constantly argued with him over training set-ups and
   tactics.
   In Holland assertiveness is considered a boon for a player, in Italy the
   managers think otherwise. Capello named them ‘professori Hollandi’ and
   that was not meant to be complementary. An unfortunate backpass in
   Udine, causing defeat, did not help Bogarde’s case, after which most of
   his Milanese days were spent in the stands.
   Then Barcelona coach Louis van Gaal relieved him of the boring training
   sessions at Marinello. The 97-98 season seemed a happy one for Bogarde.
   He was part of the title winning team and earned a recall for the Dutch
   team. However, just before he should have replaced the suspended Arthur
   Numan in the semi-final against Brazil at France 98 he broke his ankle
   in training.
   The next year Barcelona were suffering a below-par season which resulted
   in the sacking of Van Gaal. The new manager, Perreira, did not care much
   for Bogarde, sending him on a free transfer although there was still a
   year on his contract. Therefore the interest from Premiership clubs
   suited him well that summer.
   Unfortunately, Bogarde’s gut feeling was on the mark that evening at
   Stamford Bridge. Vialli was replaced by Claudio Ranieri and soon Bogarde
   ran into the same kind of trouble he had already experienced with
   Capello. His cavalier approach on the pitch is diametrically opposed to
   the caution of Italian tactics. And Bogarde has some secret buttons
   which, if pressed, can agitate him quite quickly.
   Unable to handle this big, menacing brother Ranieri relegated him to the
   reserve team. Later Bogarde did not even have a squad number or a shirt
   and spent his days on the training ground with Chelsea’s youth team. He
   never considered a premature termination of his contract, whatever
   Chelsea offered him. ‘That money is mine’, he said.
   To understand this, the book returns to Bogarde’s upbringing. The
   youngest of a family of 13, whose father, a volatile man, infrequently
   came home. Bogarde still does not care for him and has not seen him in
   years. He loved his mother though and vowed to build her a house in
   Surinam, which sadly was only finished after her death.
   When his father was not around, his youth was ok. He mainly played
   football, although he says: ‘If I had not succeeded as a player, I would
   have become a criminal; a big one.’ His family tends to disagree as they
   say he is far too nice to step into the underworld. We’ll never know as
   he did succeed in football as part of the successful Ajax team of the
   nineties. Not extremely talented, but physically and mentally very
   strong.

   Winston Bogarde in action for Chelsea. (Yes, that’s right).
   But sometimes his pride and determination got in the way. ‘Everywhere I
   came I had a disadvantage. Because I am black,’ he says. Maybe, maybe
   not; there is no clear evidence of racism in the book. A turning point
   in his career in Holland is when the salaries at Ajax surfaced in the
   spring of 1996. Several black players seemed to earn much less than the
   white, while the offered extensions on their contracts did not make up
   for that. The situation exploded during Euro 96 resulting in the
   expulsion of Edgar Davids and most of the coloured players left on a
   free Bosman transfer.
   So when Bogarde earned a satisfying amount at Chelsea he decided to stay
   out his time at the club or leave when he could make the same money
   elsewhere. Bogarde explains:
   ‘Why should I throw fifteen million euro away when it is already mine?
   At the moment I signed it was in fact my money, my contract. Both sides
   agreed wholeheartedly. I could go elsewhere to play for less, but you
   have to understand my history to understand I would never do that. I
   used to be poor as a kid, did not have anything to spend or something to
   play with. This world is about money, so when you are offered those
   millions you take them. Few people will ever earn so many. I am one of
   the few fortunates who do. I may be one of the worst buys in the history
   of the Premiership, but I don’t care.’
   He did feel humiliated, when he had to walk along his former Chelsea
   team-mates to play with the youngsters. And he hung a calendar on the
   wall of his London appartment to cross out the remaining sixty days of
   his contract, like a prisoner would. Off the training ground his life
   those days consisted of Bacardi-cola, phone calls home and large stacks
   of DVD’s.
   Eventually the 14th of May 2004 arrived : he had won the battle. He
   shook hands with some employees at Chelsea and a couple of players and
   left for the airport. The contract was over. Now he is a partner in
   Global Music Entertainment which organizes rock concerts in Holland. His
   football career is behind him, although his wish is to bring the
   national team of Surinam to the World Cup of 2014.”

   Reply
4. migcampista says:

   October 13, 2008 at 11:10 pm

   For the record, I don’t get the Parlour analogy either. Nor the NFL one. The only guaranteed money in an NFL contract is in the signing bonus. Long-term contracts are back-loaded so as to milk a players younger years and then force him when older to re-negotiate on leveraged terms or face getting cut. A middling NFL player doesn’t get to stick around on the same roster year after year.

   If I’m reading the post right, the question isn’t why Solskjaer stayed but rather why the press thought so much of him staying. Who knows? But to be honest, I basically ignore the press and haven’t been convinced I’ve been missing much. I think you may find a few more Solskjaers on teams throughout England and Europe. But they played or play on less irritating teams with no banter from the press about it. Then there’s Carlo Cudicini who has been at Chelsea for nine years now. Imagine.

   Reply
5. Chris says:

   October 19, 2008 at 12:17 pm

   Ray Parlour only entered my head whilst I was writing the post, which probably says more how my mind works than anything else.

   Solskjaer probably was in a comfort zone at United (and he’s still there as reserve team coach). As to why his ‘loyalty’ was never questioned by the media – it’s probably down to the one-dimensional view the press has over player loyalty in football: if you stick around at one club until you get a testimonial, you have some kind of special virtue which is not seen in ‘journeyman’ (if you are being kind) or ‘mercenary’ (if not) footballers.

   Reply
6. Chris says:

   October 19, 2008 at 12:22 pm

   I meant to add I was thinking about posting something about Kris Boyd and players who consider themselves ‘too good for international football’. Maybe by the next round of internationals?- such a shame Boyd has talked himself out of playing against Argentina!

   Anyway, I’ve left the US this week and am now back in England – does that make me ineligible to contribute?

   Reply
7. 40Years says:

   October 21, 2008 at 10:24 am

   Your ridiculous comparison made me angry… so losing my reply hasn’t helped things. So this version will have to be a shortened version.

   For starters, the numbers you quote don’t quite add up. You should have a look at the following.

   http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/shared/bsp/hi/football/statistics/players/s/solskjaer_27363.stm

   But I seriously don’t understand how you can question his contribution. In the seven seasons that we has fully fit, he scored on average 12 leagues goals (something a City player hasn’t been able to manage in quite some time), scoring a total of 127 goals for the club. At various stages during United career, he was first choice. In the latter years, his ambition and his belief was the main reason he stayed at United. Believing himself to be better than some of the new strikers brought into the club… Bellion, Forlan & Smith spring to mind.

   Reasons he’s loved. Here are six good examples…

   http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2007/aug/28/sport.comment2

   Reply
8. cass says:

   October 21, 2008 at 11:11 am

   My stats came from Soccerbase and I have verified them on ‘the website of dreams’ http://www.stretfordend.co.uk/playermenu/solskjaer.html
   Your stats from the BBC are for his career totals, whereas mine are based on his time at Man Utd which is the subject of my blog. And again, I understand that he is loved at Man Utd for the same reason that many players are loved at other clubs; based on the significance of his goal(s) rather than his allround ability. As for your assertion that he was first choice, he never once in 11 seasons managed 30 or more premiership starts and only twice (after his debut season in ’95, managed more than 20 premiership starts). If you start 2 games in a row it doesn’t mean you can be considered ‘first choice at various stages of his career’. The myopia of Man Utd supporters to buy their prawn sandwiches and cheer on whoever is wearing red (witness ronaldo appreciation this season after all that went on over the Summer) is not up for debate, but rather why the press gave him such a free ride.

   Reply
9. 40Years says:

   October 22, 2008 at 6:18 am

   You have misread the stats that you have based your argument on. The stats on the BBC (Current club totals) are pretty much the exact same as the ones you have used from ‘The Website of Dreams’.

   You mention that he came off “the bench 150 times (out of a total of 217 appearances) between 1996 and 2007″. Yet in reality he made 216 starts out of 368 appearances for the club, scoring 127 goals and winning every major club trophy.

   I struggle to see how even a bitter such as yourself could compare him to Bogarde. If he had turned down top teams over the years, I could see your point and he could be rightly questioned. Yet the only side that had a bit accepted were a struggling Spurs side.

   Reply
10. cass says:

    October 22, 2008 at 10:07 am

    Here are his league starts for United:

    1996/1997 – 25
    1997/1998 – 15
    1998/1999 – 9
    1999/2000 – 15
    2000/2001 – 19
    2001/2002 – 23
    2002/2003 – 29
    2003/2004 – 7
    2004/2005 – 0
    2005/2006 – 0
    2006/2007 – 9

    Hardly the record of a first choice forward….

    Reply