Haven't been following this as much as others to be fair, but what separates Heraf from Hudson's dire tactics, especially when Huddo was playing far worse sides? Why did Hudson get nowhere near the uproar over four years that Heraf is getting after one game?
Of course Heraf did come out and say that we don't have the same quality that Japan has but to be honest I don't have much of a problem with that because it's true. I have a problem with playing horrible negative football, but we can't forget that's something we endured for four years and not a single person in the media spoke up about it.
Also the 8-0 comments are pretty offensive but I'm willing to take the benefit of the doubt and assume he got lost in translation/didn't mean to be so harsh. Can't help but feel this is a big overreaction. Not to mention having players literally retire because they don't like tactics. Where's the pride? If he's really not willing to change his mindset and shark tactics just sack him and move on
Well its the context of everything.
Firstly he is the NZF Technical Director. NZF 7 or 8 years ago put in place the WoF plan which was designed to improve the quality of players and football. I remember speaking to Rob Sherman and others on a coaching course about the WoF and its ideas. Ive mentioned this before but one of the big driving factors was that FIFA had never once in any of its technical reports after tournaments spoke of NZ teams or players other than in terms of being fit and organised. After every FIFA tournament there is a technical report done on all teams who took part. Never once has a single player ever been mentioned as having been technically gifted etc. John Herdmans assistant at the time told me that it was a major ambition of the WoF to change that.
The FF arent at the same level as Japan, no problem with that but in recent years we have got credible results without playing such negative football. The FF have stalled in the last 3 or 4 years and maybe thats because we reached a ceiling with respect to the ability of the players involved.
However the Technical Director approached a game with a tactic, mindset and intent that is the absolute opposite of what all NZF coaching courses are asking coaches of juniors, youth, school, club, federation and academy to try and do.
There is no over reaction here, its a direct opposition to an approach taken by the very person who is supposed to lead our football direction which is heading in the opposite direction of NZF's intended desires.
Players retiring because of this shows a huge amount of pride as far as Im concerned, its a protest at the lack of understanding of our desires and mindset as a sports nation by our very own Technical Director.
I hated Hudson but his approach was never this awful so maybe thats why there wasnt as strong a reaction from the media. Also the FF have over the last decade or more made huge steps forward and this is frankly a huge step backwards. Also Hudson wasnt our Technical Director, his job wasnt to guide the development of all footballers in NZ.
The rumblings around the FF over the last couple of months was an indication of what we might see and for me its worse than I expected. My faith because of this is in the players, they did warn us.
Great points there, makes a lot of sense to me. Thanks! I tend to disagree with Erceg's retirement though, to me it screams entitlement and a "I'll get what I want" attitude which is very rare in NZ sports. Nobody retired from the NZ league team when David Kidwell fudgeed everything up
