MONSTER SEA GAMES CARNIVAL NEEDS A TRIM

    

JULY 28, 2017 MALAYMAIL 

 WHY has the SEA Games grown into a monster carnival? Veering from being a hunting platform for the development of future sport stars in the region.

Many will point the finger to the South East Asian Games Federation (SEAGF) — the governing body which was founded in June 1959 with six founder countries — Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos, Malaya, Thailand and Vietnam — which has now grown to 11 — with the inclusion of Singapore, Indonesia, Philippines, Brunei and Timor Leste.

What do we blame this runaway train on? For starters, Rule 34 of the SEAGF Charter clearly defines that the programme is be selected by the host.

While the main grouse is a flotilla of irrelevant sports, the first rule states: a minimum of 22 sports, with events contained therein to be determined based on the following criteria:

— 34.1: there shall be no artificial events… unless the same are already practised in the Olympic or Asian Games; — 34.2: a minimum of four NOCs must participate in a sport/event for it to be included …;

— 34.3: with the exception of Athletics, Aquatics, and Shooting, other sports shall not have more than 5 pct of the total number of events or medal tally;

— 34.4: Following the existing guidelines of Athletics and Aquatics (swimming, diving, water polo) being Compulsory Sports, with a minimum of 14 sports from Category II (35 events listed; sports in Olympics and Asian Games) and a maximum of 8 sports from Category III (15 events listed), South East Asian Games Federation Charter (as at 30 May 2010) 11 sports programme in the SEA Games should give priority or preference to sports already included in the IOC and / or OCA sports programmes.

— 34.6 Each adopted sport must belong to an existing International Sport Federation (IF) and / or an Asian Sport Federation (ASF); 34.7 The Organising Committee may hold as a “Demonstration Sports”, one (1) sport, subject to approval…

With the rules in place to safeguard the Games from exploding, the finger now shifts to the host nation for picking winnable sports to favour itself.

What started with 12 sports in the inaugural Games in Thailand in 1959 has grown to an average of 30 sports or more. While the KL Games will see 38 sports, the highest number was in 2011 when Indonesia hosted the 26th Games with 44 sports!

The other issue is the accelerating cost for a host, where the Games reflects economic clout, with grand opening and closings. Malaysia’s budget to host both the upcoming SEA Games and Asean Para Games exceeds RM400 million.

The Philippines has just pulled out of the 2019 Games, after a two-month running war with Islamic militants. It agreed in 2015 to host the 2019 SEA Games after Brunei and Vietnam declined.

On ways to cut costs, veteran sports administrator who is also an honorary member of SEAGF, Datuk Sieh Kok Chi, suggested reducing the number of sports, stop engaging consultants and agents, early planning and using existing facilities.

Datuk A. Vaithilingam, former Selangor Schools Sports Council secretary general, said: “Hosts add too much fanfare to the Games.”

Another observer said: “It seems to me the primary objective of any host in the SEA Games is to win the most gold medals. Hence the… little known sports.”

TONY is a sports journalist with close to four decades’ experience and is passionate about local sports. He can be reached at tmariadass@gmail.com

BLOG VERSION

COMMENTARY   

Level Field

Let’s make the SEA Games lean and mean

Who should take responsibility for the SEA Games having growing into a monster carnival instead of a Games as a platform for the development for future stars in the region and a Games of reputable standard?

Many will point the finger to the South East Asian Games Federation (SEAGF) – the governing body of Games which was founded in June 1959 with six founder countries – Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos, Malaya, Thailand and Vietnam – which has now grown to have eleven members – with the inclusion of Singapore, Indonesia, Philippines, Brunei and Timor Leste.

However, the SEAGF, in their Charter and Rules under Rule 34 (Programme), have clearly defined the programme to be selected by the host of each Games.

While the main grouse of sports observers and critics is that the Games has grown too big and with some irrelevant sports being included, the programme’s first rule states:

The sports programme adopted for any one SEA Games shall consist of a minimum 22 sports, with events contained therein to be determined based on the following criteria:

34.1 there shall be no artificial events, especially for those adopted team events, unless the same are already practiced in the Olympic or Asian Games.

34.2 a minimum of four NOCs must participate in a sport/event for it to be included in the programme of the SEA Games, with a proviso to allow varying the same as and when required.

34.3 with the exception of Athletics, Aquatics, and Shooting, other sports in the SEA Games programme shall not have more than five (5%) percent of the total number of events or medal tally.

34.4 Following the existing guidelines of Athletics and Aquatics being Compulsory Sports, with a minimum of 14 sports from Category II and a maximum of 8 sports from Category III, South East Asian Games Federation Charter (As at 30 May 2010) 11 sports programme in the SEA Games should give priority or preference to those sports that are already included in the IOC and/or OCA sports programmes.

CATEGORY I: COMPULSORY SPORTS

Athletics 2. Swimming (including Diving and water polo)

CATEGORY II: SPORTS IN THE OLYMPIC GAMES AND THE ASIAN GAMES (MINIMUM 14 SPORTS)

1. Archery 2. Badminton 3. Baseball 4. Basketball 5. Billiards & Snooker 6. Bowling (Tenpin) 7. Boxing 8. Canoeing 9. Cycling 10. Equestrian & Polo 11. Fencing 12. Football 13. Golf 14. Gymnastics 15. Handball 16. Hockey 17. Judo 18. Karate-do 19. Modern Pentathlon 20. Rowing 21. Rugby 22. Sailing 23. Sepak Takraw 24. Softball 25. Soft Tennis 26. Shooting 27. Squash 28. Table Tennis 29. Taekwondo 30. Tennis 31. Triathlon 32. Volleyball 33. Weightlifting 34. Wrestling 35. Wushu

CATEGORY III: OTHER SPORTS (MAXIMUM 8 SPORTS)

1. Arnis 2. Bodybuilding 3. Chess 4. Dance sport 5. Fin swimming 6. Lawn Bowls 7. Kempo 8. Muay 9. Netball 10. Petanque 11. Pencak Silat 12. Shuttlecock 13. Traditional Boat Race 14. Water skiing 15. Vovinam

34.6 Each adopted sport must belong to an existing International Sport Federation (IF) and/or an Asian Sport Federation (ASF)

34.7 The Organising Committee may hold as a “Demonstration Sports”, one (1) sport, subject to the approval of the Executive Committee

With the rules in place to safeguard the Games from turning into a carnival and to keep in line to keep the Games respectable, the Games have still become huge with many irrelevant sports.

Basically, it is the host nation who is to be blamed for increasing the number of sports, especially sports which they can win medals and tailoring the programme, especially increasing the number of events in their sports, to favour the host nation.

What started with 12 sports in the inaugural Games in Thailand in 1959 has grown to an average of 30 sports or more in recent Games.

While in Malaysia next month will see 38 sports contested, the highest number of sports in a Games was when Indonesia hosted the 26^th Games in 2011, where 44 sports were competed!

Maye the SEAGF may want to consider reviewing their Category III in their programme of other sports, from their current minimum of two to eight to a maybe just two or maximum four, to keep the Games relevant to give priority to sports competed at the Olympic and Asian Games.

The other issue which is concerning about the Games is the accelerating cost of hosting the Games.

What used to be Games organised at minimum cost without all the fanfares, the Games has become an avenue to showcase the nation’s ability to make the Games grand scale with a lot of money spent on opening and closing ceremonies.

For instance Malaysia’s budget to host both the SEA Games and ASEAN Para Games exceeds RM400 million.

And it is no surprise that we find countries withdrawing from hosting the Games after initial acceptance according to the rotation basis of hosts, as economic situations and other priorities issues of utilising available funds force them rethink.

The Philippines has pulled out of hosting the 2019 Games citing the government’s focus on rebuilding a city ravaged by a two-month battle between security forces and Islamic militants.

The country’s sports officials formally abandoned their plans to host the games after a series of meetings with President Rodrigo Duterte, Philippine Sports Commission chairman William Ramirez said.

The Philippines agreed in 2015 to host the 2019 SEA Games after two other countries, Brunei and Vietnam, declined.

There have several suggestions by sports observers and veteran sports administrators to reduce costs of hosting the Games.

Veteran sports administrator who is also an honorary member of the SEAGF, Datuk Sieh Kok Chi suggested reducing the number of sports, stop engaging consultants and agents, early planning, using existing sports facilities and finally decide on an affordable budget and work within this budget with strict controls.

Datuk Vaithilingam Ampalavanar, former Selangor Schools Sports Council secretary-general, said: “Hosts add a lot of fanfare to the Games which was not necessary and can help cut overall cost.”

He asked if show case of entertainment just to satisfy the Tourism and Cultural divisions was necessary.

“Do entertainment shows in the world organise sports for their ceremonies,” he asked.

“Do International Conferences organise such extravagant ceremonies?

Why only for International Sports? For athletes the Games is their priority, not musicians and dancers,” he asserted. 

He pleaded: “I am not exaggerating, please have only sports and save sports! Not promote culture, entertainment and tourism.”

Maybe sports has evolved and sports these days entails sports tourism, but still it can be done in moderation and not spend exorbitant sums of money on entertainment.

Another observer said: “It seems to me the primary objective of any host in the SEA Games is to win the most gold medals! Hence the games are enlarged to accommodate little known sports so that the host is strong.”

Datuk Dina Rizal, who has been associated with sports for decades said:

“Change the mind-set to produce Sea champions not national heroes.

“Forget this patronising attitude each time a host nation organises SEA Games to include sports to please host nation and losing the Olympic and Asian targets.”

Indeed it is time to make the Sea Games more relevant to the development of sports in the region to make headway at the Asian level for starters.

TONY is a sports

journalist with close to

four decades’ experience

and is passionate about

local sports.

He can be reached at

tmariadass@gmail.com

DOWN TO THE WIRE

    

JULY 21, 2017 MALAYMAIL

  THE overall champions of the Kuala Lumpur SEA Games will be determined by the country winning between 80 to 90 gold medals and not 100 or more gold medals.

While Malaysia’s target as hosts is to finish overall champions with over 100 gold medals, a feat that would match the 2001 haul of 111 gold medals when we last hosted and emerged champions, Thailand could spoil the fairytale ending.

At the 2001 Games, Thailand attained 103 gold medals to end up as runners-up. Thailand have boldly predicted a 100-gold tally for this year’s Games.

If Malaysia and Thailand’s target are met, it will mean out of 11 participating countries, these two would bag 210 gold medals out of 405 at stake from 38 sports.

While both Malaysia and Thailand managed to win more than 100 medals at the 2001 Games, standards have risen.

Others like Indonesia have always been keen competitors. Vietnam have emerged as a strong contender in recent years.

An average of gold medals won calculated over the last four Games, sees Thailand topping the list with an average of 96 gold; having emerged champion in 2009 (83 gold medals), 2011 (100), 2013 (107) and 2015 (96).

Indonesia who hosted the 2011 edition have an average of 78 gold medals over four Games, winning 151 gold medals when they were host, 53 in 2009, 65 in 2013 and 47 at the last (2015) Games in Singapore.

Lesser countries like Cambodia, Laos, Brunei and Timor Leste, can win between one and five gold medals between them.

Purely based on averages, all indications are the overall champions will win less than 100 gold medals.

Olympic Council of Malaysia, assistant secretary and veteran and experienced sports official, Datuk Sieh Kok Chi, has boldly predicted Malaysia will emerge as champions — based on an analysis he did on winning patterns in the Games’ history and also the events picked for the KL Games.

His optimism stems from the removal of five sports from the 28th SEA Games programme that Malaysia did not win any gold or silver medals — canoe, floorball, rowing, softball and traditional boat race. This reduces the gold medal tally of Thailand by 11.

• Dropping five disciplines of the 28th SEA Games programme in which Malaysia did not win any gold — precision shooting, billiards/pools, keel boat and sanda.

• Addition of seven sports with 54 events that were not in the Singapore SEA Games — bodybuilding, cricket, ice hockey, ice skating, karate, lawn bowls, and weightlifting; Malaysia are strong in all seven.

• Addition of events in existing sports, such as track cycling, rhythmic gymnastics, squash and women’s football. (Track) cycling — sprint, team sprint, keirin, team pursuit, individual pursuit, omnium, scratch race, points race for men and women.

• And as hosts, he expects Malaysia to see between 10 per cent to 15 per cent improvement in the gold tally.

Based on Kok Chi’s analysis Malaysia can finish at the top with around 118 gold if
not more.

But despite all “tailoring”, indications are the battle of supremacy is going to be a close call between Malaysia and Thailand.

Among the sports making waves at international level include badminton, athletics, hockey, diving, swimming, track cycling, tenpin bowling, lawn bowl and archery. But the question going begging is whether Malaysians peaked too early?

But coaches have assured that all is going according to plan come Aug 19 — amidst the fact that many NSAs are still being coy about their gold forecast.

Will Malaysia’s “master plan” to emerge champion fall into place, or will the race with Thailand go down to the wire. The verdict be known on Aug 30 but everything points to the champions buoyed only by about 90 gold medals.

TONY is a sports journalist with close to four decades’ experience

and is passionate about local sports.

He can be reached at

tmariadass@gmail.com​

BLOG VERSION 

Level Field

Champion with less than 100 gold medals?

THE 2017 KL Sea Games overall champion country will be determined with the country winning between 80 and 90 gold medals and not 100 or more gold medals.

While Malaysia as host have declared that they are determined to emerge overall champion and see the need to win more than 100 gold medals and probably match the 2001 achievement of 111 gold medals when hosted the last time and emerged champion, Thailand will be the closest rival.

At the 2001 KL Games, Thailand attained 103 gold medals to emerge runners-up.

For next month’s Games, Thailand have boldly predicted 100 gold medal tally.

If Malaysia and Thailand’s target are met, it will mean that between these two countries out of the 11 participating countries, they would bag about 210 gold medals out of the 402 at stake from 36 sports.

While both Malaysia and Thailand managed to win more than 100 medals at the 2001 Games, the Games standards have risen and so has the standard of many participating countries.

Other countries like Indonesia have always been keen competitors in the Games, while Vietnam has emerged as strong contenders in recent years.

An average of gold medals won calculated over the last four Games, sees Thailand topping the list with an average of 96 gold medals having emerged champions in 2009 (83 gold medals), 2011 (100), 2013 (107) and 2015 (96).

Indonesia who hosted the 2011 Games have an average of 78 gold medals over four Games having winning 151 gold medals when they hosted, 53 in 2009, 65 in 2013 and 47 at the last Games in Singapore.

When Indonesia hosted, there were 44 sports and 545 gold medals at stake. At the 2009 Games in Vientiane there were only 29 sports and 372 gold medals at stake, while at the 2013 Games in Myanmar there were 37 sports and 460 medals were at stake. In Singapore two years ago, 36 sports were held for 402 gold medals.

Just based on the averages of the six out of 11 countries, a total of 418 medals would have been distributed between them.

What about other countries like Cambodia, Laos, Brunei and Timor Leste, who probably will win anything between one and five gold medals between them.

Purely based on averages, all indications are the overall champion will be determined by winning less than 100 gold medals.

No doubt Malaysia have calculated their medal hauls and are confident of a 100 gold medal and more, it is very unlikely to happen, even more so with Thailand equally confident of a 100 gold medal haul.

Olympic Council of Malaysia, assistant secretary and veteran and experienced sports official, Datuk Sieh Kok Chi, has boldly predicted Malaysia will emerge as champions and based on an analysis he did on winning patterns in the Games’ history and also the sports which have been carefully selected for the KL Games.

Among his reasons for optimism include the removal of five sports from the 28th SEA Games programme that Malaysia did not win any gold or silver medals — canoe, floorball, rowing, softball and traditional boat race. This reduces the gold medal tally of Thailand by 11.

• Dropping five disciplines of the 28th SEA Games programme in which Malaysia did not win any gold — precision shooting, billiards/pools, keel boat and sanda.

• Addition of seven sports with 54 events that were not in the Singapore SEA Games — namely, bodybuilding, cricket, ice hockey, ice skating, karate, lawn bowls, and weightlifting. Malaysia are strong in all seven.

• Addition of events in existing sports, such as track cycling, rhythmic gymnastics, squash and women’s football. (Track cycling — sprint, sprint team, keirin, team pursuit, individual pursuit, omnium, scratch race, points race for men and women.

• And as hosts, he expects Malaysia to see between 10 per cent to 15 per cent improvement in the gold tally.

Based on Kok Chi’s analysis Malaysia can finish at the top with around 118 gold if not more.

But despite all ‘tailoring’ indications are that the battle of supremacy is still going to be between Malaysia and Thailand and is going to be a close call.

And with next Games host Philippines and next year’s Asian Games host Indonesia, surely determined to put up a good show, the battle could well intensify.

While the sports and events for the KL Games have been carefully selected to give Malaysia an advantage – as it is usual in all previous Games with host – it is still no guarantee with all the predicted gold medals.

For starters, the National Sports Associations (NSAs) who were very optimistic with their medal target prediction when attended the selection committee meeting in June with the Olympic Council of Malaysia for their inclusion of their athletes for the Games, many have toned down of recent.

In a recent two-day meeting with all NSAs competing in the Games organised by the National Sports Council to determine the actual medal predictions for the Games, many NSAs have started to play down their chances or playing safe.

Among the reasons for their playing down their chances included injuries, opposition for rival countries and in some cases current forms of their athletes.

With the recent performances of athletes at world, Asian and international meets have given a positive impact for Malaysian sports in generally, but has directly added more pressure to perform at the Sea Games level.

Among the sports who have performed well at international level included badminton, athletics, hockey, diving, swimming, track cycling, tenpin bowling, lawn bowl and archery.

There is even questions being asked if the athletes have peaked too early and might have a problems at the Sea Games?

But respective coaches have assured that everything is going well and according to plan and they should have no problems rising to the occasion at the Games starting on Aug 19.

Many NSAs are still coy about making their targets openly, while many have come out openly to express their confidence to win gold medals in their respective sports.

Will Malaysia’s ‘master plan’ to emerge as champions all fall in place, or it will go down the wire having to fight tooth and nail to achieve its target, will all be known on Aug 30.

But everything points to the champion emerging by winning about 90 gold medal.

TONY is a sports

journalist with close to

four decades’ experience

and is passionate about

local sports.

He can be reached at

tmariadass@gmail.com

MALAYSIAN FOOTBALL LOOKING FOR WINNING WAYS ­– NATURALLY

    

JULY 14, 2017 MALAYMAIL

ARE foreign players and naturalised players the answer to Malaysian football woes?

The question of foreign players dominating the M-League and a coach resorting to naturalised players to anchor the national team, has been tossed around like a rugby ball.

It has re-surfaced with the latest national coach Nelo Vingada toying with the idea of banking on naturalised players and duly declaring that the domination of foreigners, especially in the striker’s role, has limited his selection of locals.

There is nothing new in Vingada’s panacea because for close to a decade now, the problem has been compounded by the rising intake of foreign players in the M-League.

Former national coaches Datuk K. Rajagobal and B. Sathianathan, who had also questioned the lack of good local strikers, were instead singled out to face the disciplinary board.

As in their defence, Vingada too cannot be blamed for the pursuit of naturalised players as he has to attain results for a good track record in his two-year contract. The Football Association of Malaysia (FAM) only offer a short contract but expect instant results.

Henceforth, after locking in naturalised players, he has to count on local veterans. Sure, he can manage to string a few good results with the older stars and a few naturalised players, but when they exit after two years, the national team is back to square one. The veteran players fade out and Malaysian football flounders further.

FAM ought to address the real issue of a level playing field — the huge presence of foreign players in the M-League (more than 90 this season) that stunts the exposure of budding locals.

Every team in the M-League hires foreign strikers — a vicious cycle. After 14 matches of the Super League, foreigners top the scorers’ list while the best local hitman is JDT’s Safiq Rahim with eight goals while the leading scorer is Lebanese Mohamad Ghaddar with 20 goals.

A revival of Malaysian football will need two Olympic cycles — eight years — and at worst, a minimal six-year programme.

Coaches or technical directors must be hired on longer contracts so they can start working with youth players. Fans too must wait out the long term vision. Or look back at Datuk K. Rajagobal, who, as national coach won the Sea Games gold in 2009 in Laos after 20 years and the Suzuki (AFF) Cup in 2010.

Many who started with him as youth players are still with the national team, including the likes of Shafiq Rahim, Azamuddin Mohd Akil, Amir Yahaya, Aidil Zafuan, S. Kunalan, Safee Ali, Mahalli Jasuli, Badrol Bakhtiar, Mohd Syazwan Zainon and Mohd Amirulhadi Zainal.

So are naturalised players the best leg forward for Malaysian football? Do we want an ‘international team’ instead of a national team?

Latest comes the appointment of a new technical advisor in Dutchman Peter de Roo, following the two-year contract of German Fritz Schmid.

The FAM is also hiring a ‘ranking consultant’. Win matches over better ranked teams, and the rankings go up. The mode for ranking is all tabulated and known to all. Is there a backdoor to a rise in rankings? Malaysian football never fails to puzzle!

TONY is a Sports Journalist with close to four decades’ experience and is passionate about local sports. He can be reached at tmariadass@gmail.com

BLOG VERSION

COMMENTARY   

Level Field

Is Malaysian football heading the right path?

Is foreign players and naturalised players the answer to Malaysian football woes?

The question of foreign players playing in the M-League and resorting to naturalised players to strengthen the national team has been raised and discussed on numerous occasions.

It has once again surfaced with the latest national coach Nelo Vingada toying with the idea of securing naturalised players to strengthen his team and declared that the domination of foreign players, especially in the striker’s role, has limited his selection of local players.

There is nothing new in what Vingada is saying because it is a known fact for close to a decade now at least, but the problem is only been compounded by continuously increasing the number of foreign players intake in the M-League.

And what Vingada plans has to strengthen his team is no surprise because he has to attain results during his short two-year term contract.

This again has been happening over and over where FA of Malaysia offer short contracts (normally two years) and expect immediate results.

What does the foreign coach do? He calls local experienced and older players into the squad as there is a dearth of young local talent, he has too short to build a team around youngsters as he need to produce immediate results and suggests to attain naturalised players.

One cannot blame the foreign coaches for their stance because they want some results to be shown in their CVs during their stint in Malaysia.

These foreign coaches normally will manage to string a few good results with the older and experienced players and probably with few naturalised players, but happens after they leave after two years?

We are back to square one as the older and experienced players will no longer be interested to continue playing their performance would be on the decline because of their age.

We start all over again and make the same mistake as Malaysian football continue to sink further.

Instead of addressing the issue at hand – the huge presence of foreign players in the M-League (more than 90 players this season) which is stifling the development of local players rather than assist in the development.

There is a dearth of local strikers because every team in the M-League hires foreign strikers.

After 14 matches of the Super League, the foreign players dominate the goal scoring list while the best local scorer is JDT’s Safiq Rahim with eight goals while the leading scorer Lebanese Mohamad Ghaddar with 20 goals

We need to reduce the number of foreign players plying their trade in the M-League to give opportunity for more local players to be exposed in the local league.

The reduction of quota of foreign players in the M-League will also mean that State and clubs will be more stringent in selecting and hiring the foreign players, which in turn will see better quality foreign players hired.

But for anything positive to happen for Malaysian football, it will not be an overnight process.

We have to have at least two Olympic cycles – eight years – and at worst a minimum six years programme to achieve anything substantial.

Coaches or technical directors hired must be given long term contracts so that they can start work with the youth and develop.

Otherwise Malaysian football will continue to hope for miracles to happen through their short term plans but end up disappointed each time and not to mention huge sums wasted money which could have been out to good use especially on development and long term visions.

Of course the fans will not be happy as they want to see instant results, but that is not going to happen and the sooner they realise that and support the long term vision and programmes, the better.

Just look back when Datuk K. Rajagobal as national coach won the  Sea Games gold in 2009 in Laos after 20 years and winning the Suzuki (AFF) Cup in 2010.

It certainly did not happen overnight or Rajagobal waved a magic wand and everything fell in place.

For those who have short memory, Rajagobal started off with taking charge of the National Under-19 team in preparation for a quadrangular tournament in Kuala Lumpur involving S. Korea, Brazil, Portugal and Malaysia in 2006. He then took charge of the national Under-21 team preparing for Asian qualifier for the World Youth.

He was involved with the youth team for four years till 2009 when he was in charge of the national Under-23 and national team. He then handed over the Harimau Muda team (Under-23) to Ong Kim Swee and was fully in charge of the national team before he was unceremoniously discharged in 2013.

Many of his players who started with him as youth players are still playing with the national team which includes the likes of Shafiq Rahim, Azamuddin Mohd Akil, Amir Yahaya, Aidil Zafuan, S. Kunalan, Safee Ali, Mahalli Jasuli, Badrol Bakhtiar, Mohd Syazwan Zainon and Mohd Amirulhadi Zainal to name few

Coming back to naturalised players, is it the way to go forward for Malaysian football? Will it do more harm or good? Do we want players representing the nation who cannot sing the national anthem? How long will they don national colours? How will they blend with the local players? Will the local players resent them? Will places for local players be taken up by naturalised players and the national team is an ‘international team’ instead of a national team?

Malaysia is already a multi-racial nation with the Malays, Chinese, Indians, Eurasians, Punjabis and the various ethnic groups in East Malaysia with having their own strong points like artistic and skilful, intelligent, fitness, and strength and built. In short Malaysia has a world class composition and all it takes gelling them together with a fair mode of selection.

It is indeed sad that emphasis is not given to the AFC Under-23 qualifier where coach Ong is struggling to assemble a team when this is the team which should be moulded with the future in mind.

All priority should have been given to the preparation of this team without any hitches.

Latest is the appointment of a new technical advisor in Dutchman Peter De Roo after not renewing the two year contract of German Fritz Schmid which ended earlier.

How much De Roo can change things for Malaysia football is left to be seen.

FA of Malaysia is also planning to hire a ‘ranking consultant’.

As far I as I know, win matches over better ranked teams and the rankings will go up. The mode for ranking is all tabulated and known to all.

Is there a back door to raising the rankings?

Malaysian football never fails to puzzle and amuse!

TONY is a sports

journalist with close to

four decades’ experience

and is passionate about

local sports.

He can be reached at

tmariadass@gmail.com