Not the same...or as you say, "same difference".
...just not the same.
Just consider that at the two extremes with the excellent program Stoni requests we put in...you can on one hand have best team and no local player and on the other you can have best team with no foreign based player.
Why would one even consider a situation of putting less than our best team on the field of play...even creating a policy to ensure that at sometime that must occur? A policy to ensure such a 'handcuffing' of our nation appears faulty to me. ...and yes, I am biased towards 'best for our football representatives and Jamaica'.
btw - Do you realize that instituting policy of allowing for less than best team and thus less than best performances could limit marketing opportunities for individual player, team, Jamaica's football and country as the difference in value on exposure in the world's market-place as team advances in world tournaments and on building demand for nations to request our teams for friendly performances measure in ten of millions...even billions of dollars? ... not advancing equals opportunities at reaping such value lost?
Consider we are still reaping world awareness as a result of the 1998 World Cup appearance? ...consider opportunities lost as a result of our non-appearance at tournaments - CONFED Gold Cups, CONFEDERATION CUPs and World Cups and the junior tournaments and the Women tournaments?
Consider the marketing boon, for example, a Brazil gets for its players, coaches and country?
Again, why would you wish to institute a policy that would hinder progress to even a smidgen of value that could accrue to our country?
...just not the same.
Just consider that at the two extremes with the excellent program Stoni requests we put in...you can on one hand have best team and no local player and on the other you can have best team with no foreign based player.
Why would one even consider a situation of putting less than our best team on the field of play...even creating a policy to ensure that at sometime that must occur? A policy to ensure such a 'handcuffing' of our nation appears faulty to me. ...and yes, I am biased towards 'best for our football representatives and Jamaica'.
btw - Do you realize that instituting policy of allowing for less than best team and thus less than best performances could limit marketing opportunities for individual player, team, Jamaica's football and country as the difference in value on exposure in the world's market-place as team advances in world tournaments and on building demand for nations to request our teams for friendly performances measure in ten of millions...even billions of dollars? ... not advancing equals opportunities at reaping such value lost?
Consider we are still reaping world awareness as a result of the 1998 World Cup appearance? ...consider opportunities lost as a result of our non-appearance at tournaments - CONFED Gold Cups, CONFEDERATION CUPs and World Cups and the junior tournaments and the Women tournaments?
Consider the marketing boon, for example, a Brazil gets for its players, coaches and country?
Again, why would you wish to institute a policy that would hinder progress to even a smidgen of value that could accrue to our country?
Comment