Thread: Club vs Country (Viduka etc.)
View Single Post
Old 02-18-2004, 03:27 AM   #1
toxic rooster
adjective noun
 
toxic rooster's Avatar
 
Posts: 30,417
toxic rooster makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)toxic rooster makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)toxic rooster makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)toxic rooster makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)toxic rooster makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)toxic rooster makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)toxic rooster makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)toxic rooster makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)toxic rooster makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)toxic rooster makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)toxic rooster makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)toxic rooster makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)toxic rooster makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Club vs Country (Viduka etc.)
Yeah just thought I'd get opinions on the whole club v country thing, like what's happening with Leeds and Australia over Viduka right now.

I think it's a case of a rock and a hard place for Viduka.

I think it's sad that FIFA/ASA or whoever is gonna suspend him. He wants to repay Leeds the debt he owes them by letting him go home to Melbourne while his dad was sick. Leeds obviously want Viduka to stay and play for them against Manchester United. But the Aussies want to play in Venezuela to "acclimatise" to South American conditions, as they will have to play in south america to qualify for WC 2006.

Leeds after all, are the ones who pay Viduka, and it's the clubs who ultimately get the player to the stage where they get national selector's recognition and selected etc. But the national team wants them to just drop everything and play for them otherwise they get suspended for whatever they miss plus five days.

I reckon that's a bit unreasonable. If the clubs should really be expected to release their players for the national team, I think there should be some compensation scheme for the clubs.

Thats' just Wee Gooner's opinion
toxic rooster is offline