Why always American or Australian examples are provided ? There are 200 other Football playing nations & 22 of them are above USA & 47 are above Australia, why examples of those 46 nations out of top 48 nations are not quoted ? Are their system not good ?
Rohan was just trying to show that it is possible. Just like legacy fans are saying that if ISL is allowed AFC berth it will set a precedent for other nations to follow. Similarly, Rohan brought examples from AUS and USA. Both logic is same: 1 or 2 examples are enough to set a precedence, no matter it comes from Brazil or Tonga !!
Australia and USA are examples of countries with no football pedigree like us compared to the vast majority of other footballing nations. So, they are the examples we need to look at.
So we need to adopt things from so called footballing nations who don't have football pedigree (USA & Aus) just like us......Great Logic.......Prafooool & Aunty will be dancing in joy & Das & Dhar will be blowing horns & Bhutia will be crookedly smiling. By the way why we don't adopt Nepal or Bhutan or Sri Lanka model ? They don't have football pedigree as well.
@ArsenalFan700 , I don't understand your logic. Recognition of AIFF does not mean anything, it should conform to AFC/ FIFA criteria only.
FIFA rules say the topmost league should not be privately owned. By topmost they mean the topmost, and the topmost. American Soccer league (whatever it is) is not the topmost league of US.
Also, playing in a private league apart from the main league should not call for a ban, so deserving players may surely be taken from that league, only that league may not pose as the top league (and therefore cannot send the winning team to continental tournaments).
Another point everyone is missing is that till now the Indian players and some foreigners were shared between ISL and I-league. But with a possibility that both the league running in parallel, it will interesting which league gets the good set of players. I am assuming players would not be playing two leagues for two different teams simultaneously (AFC/FIFA wont allow that). Looking at the income of the Indian players in ISL, I believe players will try to join ISL. Surely, it will further affect the quality of I-league and to a lot of extent ISL because many I-league teams wont loan players to ISL. This decision of both league simultaneously is a mess in terms of quality and logistics. Also, it will be interesting to see how the foreigner rule of ISL be affected due to the AFC constraint of 4 foreign players in AFC cups.
this debate is not going anywhere. It has currently turned into a tussle of I-league vs ISl which itself is basically flawed because of some morons sitting under the banner AIFF and IMG-R.
Debate should have been how to have a proper league structure and establishing only 1 league in the system which runs for 7-8 months and which takes into account everything starting from commercialization to history.
People forget that this history is what has pushed Indian football these 100 years and kept it alive albeit against foolish decisions being taken by people at the helm.
When I learnt first time that between 1950 to 1986 , when Indian football was still shining (atleast till 1970's era), AIFF morons decided to focus on Internal Domestic Calender and decided not to play in any official Tournaments like FIA World Cup qualifiers.
Just think about it. Since then AIFF has still not been able to fix the Domestic Calender. I should say it was excellent foresight by the then football administrators who new pretty well how much time we Indians might require to fix our structure.
I know this discussions is never going to go away because too many ppl here still hold a belief that laws and traditionalism will still prevail.
Also a fear of the unknown for existing clubs like legacy clubs.
To think of this from a overall scheme of things you have to understand India is a very important country from FIFA and AFC purposes primarily becos of the domestic market and potential global investment power.
To kickstart the Indian project was a long term goal for FIFA with mixed results. One of it that stuck was the support of the deal with IMG and AIFF tacitly pushed by blatter's FIFA to replace by 2012 the current I-league.
2012 was when "PSL" was initiated but IMG-Rel was woefully ill prepAred for overseas players contracts were not ready, SDAT permissions were not given in writing (Agreements) plus domestic players FPAI were against PSL at the time before BB was convinced.
2013 came and opposition was only really SCGoa, Churchill with Dempo and Salgoacar brought on board with FCGoa and Bengal clubs silent to a wait and watch mode.
Ex players with reputation lik Carlton Vijayan , BB brought in to give local reputation going.
2013 happened and was a success in terms of sponsorship and crowds. Giving also I-league a collateral effect of increased crowd.
2014, 2015 all came and went with each year stabilizing ISL with increased pressure on I-league to be replaced. 2016 was the original plan postponed to 2017 for a merged league so here we are.
blatter is gone but the same project from FIFA remains. It needs India as a potential developing power for which IMG -Rel deal with AIFF is the answer.
It all sounds like a corporate conspiracy politics but that's world football and I-league does not stand a chance.
The reason for me to happen on this is the potential investment that corporate India can bring In with long term infrastructure development in the domestic game bcos frankly Netagiri doesn't work in sport And has never worked.
Best we can hope for is to have 10 Rs out of every 100 sucked by corporate India put back into the sport rather than the current 1 re out of every 100 rupees put by PP and co.
And yes before any sarcastic Lol put on my "potential investment in infrastructure" think about it as we have seen how much AIFF has done to the sport in India. I have seen it since 90's and am willing to risk something different as it can't get any worse than this under AIFF.
Comments
P.S. 1st and last ranked nations
FIFA rules say the topmost league should not be privately owned. By topmost they mean the topmost, and the topmost. American Soccer league (whatever it is) is not the topmost league of US.
Also, playing in a private league apart from the main league should not call for a ban, so deserving players may surely be taken from that league, only that league may not pose as the top league (and therefore cannot send the winning team to continental tournaments).
Also, it will be interesting to see how the foreigner rule of ISL be affected due to the AFC constraint of 4 foreign players in AFC cups.
this debate is not going anywhere. It has currently turned into a tussle of I-league vs ISl which itself is basically flawed because of some morons sitting under the banner AIFF and IMG-R.
Debate should have been how to have a proper league structure and establishing only 1 league in the system which runs for 7-8 months and which takes into account everything starting from commercialization to history.
People forget that this history is what has pushed Indian football these 100 years and kept it alive albeit against foolish decisions being taken by people at the helm.
When I learnt first time that between 1950 to 1986 , when Indian football was still shining (atleast till 1970's era), AIFF morons decided to focus on Internal Domestic Calender and decided not to play in any official Tournaments like FIA World Cup qualifiers.
Just think about it. Since then AIFF has still not been able to fix the Domestic Calender. I should say it was excellent foresight by the then football administrators who new pretty well how much time we Indians might require to fix our structure.
Also a fear of the unknown for existing clubs like legacy clubs.
To think of this from a overall scheme of things you have to understand India is a very important country from FIFA and AFC purposes primarily becos of the domestic market and potential global investment power.
To kickstart the Indian project was a long term goal for FIFA with mixed results. One of it that stuck was the support of the deal with IMG and AIFF tacitly pushed by blatter's FIFA to replace by 2012 the current I-league.
2012 was when "PSL" was initiated but IMG-Rel was woefully ill prepAred for overseas players contracts were not ready, SDAT permissions were not given in writing (Agreements) plus domestic players FPAI were against PSL at the time before BB was convinced.
2013 came and opposition was only really SCGoa, Churchill with Dempo and Salgoacar brought on board with FCGoa and Bengal clubs silent to a wait and watch mode.
Ex players with reputation lik Carlton Vijayan , BB brought in to give local reputation going.
2013 happened and was a success in terms of sponsorship and crowds. Giving also I-league a collateral effect of increased crowd.
2014, 2015 all came and went with each year stabilizing ISL with increased pressure on I-league to be replaced. 2016 was the original plan postponed to 2017 for a merged league so here we are.
blatter is gone but the same project from FIFA remains. It needs India as a potential developing power for which IMG -Rel deal with AIFF is the answer.
It all sounds like a corporate conspiracy politics but that's world football and I-league does not stand a chance.
The reason for me to happen on this is the potential investment that corporate India can bring In with long term infrastructure development in the domestic game bcos frankly Netagiri doesn't work in sport And has never worked.
Best we can hope for is to have 10 Rs out of every 100 sucked by corporate India put back into the sport rather than the current 1 re out of every 100 rupees put by PP and co.
And yes before any sarcastic Lol put on my "potential investment in infrastructure" think about it as we have seen how much AIFF has done to the sport in India. I have seen it since 90's and am willing to risk something different as it can't get any worse than this under AIFF.