I'll explain why.
I've been following football for many years, more than half of my life. I saw big talking coaches and players, great, flairy teams that came up to nowhere. And I saw pragmatic men, sitting on their benches, getting boos and the worst critics from so called 'expertised' commentators and journalists...and I saw their captains raising trophies and this is what got and stand in history.
In the latest 5 years, the amount of media content increased marchingly. And along that growth of course the football talk grew too. Blogs, videos, columns in websites, newspapers...the voice of these crap fabricators, the words of these bull***t manufacturers called 'media people' is accessible and digested more than ever.
Let me explain this: in '94, Brazil won a flawless World Cup, no loss. Not a charming football, it's true, but that team had its moments of true brazilian art. After 24 years, Brazil won. And Parreira was crucified, because according to the 'expertised' he hadn't balls to come up with a more offensive squad.
12 years later, he had that much more offensive squad. And Brazil was easy prey to France. Result? The same bastards who criticized him after putting Brazil in the top rank of WC trophies asking for a more 'eye candy' team, now crushed him for giving them what they wanted all alon.
Now let's come down to Dunga. His profile, his results as a coach are EXCELLENT. Fact. No question about it. But people are still unsatisfied. And last night, in the press conference aftter the match against The Drogba's Friends Team, he swore - audible - on a journalist who apparently disagreed about something he said, nodding, as someone here pointed out.
Let me tell about this journalist. He's a pain the ass. His name is Alex Escobar, he's from Rio de Janeiro where every goddamn person there thinks that knows EVERYTHING about football. About playing, about coaching, EVERYTHING. And I'm probably not wrong but there are no 'cariocas' (people from Rio) in Dunga's team. He has severely and frequently beated up Dunga in his blog and column since he decided for the 23 to Africa.
In '97, Scolari was Palmeiras' coach and a 'smart' journalist tried to pull a funny interview with him, full of ironies about his work. No negotation: Scolari punched him straight in the chin. It was stupid because the guy became even more famous after that. Two years before, '95, Flamengo and Gremio were semifinalists in Brazil's Cup. Ex-Madrid's Luxemburgo coached Flamengo. He started pressuring the referee. No negotiation: Scolari, who coached Gremio, punched him twice in the face. Luxemburgo is carioca, btw.
I'm not a violence appreciator or endorse it but some people EARN it. And in the case of the moronic media people, either they're just smart ones, trying to step on some coach's back or cariocas with a mic, I find no guilty at all. They want to tease a guy until he breaks and they'll brag about it. And if the teased one wants to argue using the voice of reason, the answer is simple: 'the football needs the media'.
BULLCRAP. The media needs football. I'm done with snob journalists who really think they can control facts and football like puppet masters. The fans DON'T WANT YOUR OPINION, MORONS. They want dribbling, efforts, endurance, beauty, flair, goals. This is what the guardless bloody consumers of the poop you come up with really need, not your poop at all.
I'll support and admire Dunga forever even if he loses this Cup. This is exactly what a coach should do: competence, hard work and a unshakeable stand. No one can move him because he knows what he does and he truly believes it.
It's a time of fake gentlemanship, of 'sensitivity'. We're living and watching times of sweet arrogance, disguised among words and paragraphs. Passive agressive atitudes which can't be answered in the same level because in that case, and solely that case, it's unpolite.
I'm not gaucho, (from Brazil's south region) but I totally understand what these guys go through. And as for Scolari, people pick on Dunga for that reason, they're both Gauchos - specially cariocas do that. They hate the gaucho's pride about his land and his way of playing football - much more focused on marking and tactics rather than improvise and skill.
Now can a journalist bring it in his pocked when he interviews someone? Can he carry his 'clubism' when he's talking about football in general, when he gives opinions? Since a 'media professional' has his own space - facebooks, blogs, tweeters - is he allowed to talk about football in the way he wants, even with partiality? If he does, do you think that isn't dangerous to the point of influencing his opinions when the context allows no partiality at all? I'll let you say.
I've been following football for many years, more than half of my life. I saw big talking coaches and players, great, flairy teams that came up to nowhere. And I saw pragmatic men, sitting on their benches, getting boos and the worst critics from so called 'expertised' commentators and journalists...and I saw their captains raising trophies and this is what got and stand in history.
In the latest 5 years, the amount of media content increased marchingly. And along that growth of course the football talk grew too. Blogs, videos, columns in websites, newspapers...the voice of these crap fabricators, the words of these bull***t manufacturers called 'media people' is accessible and digested more than ever.
Let me explain this: in '94, Brazil won a flawless World Cup, no loss. Not a charming football, it's true, but that team had its moments of true brazilian art. After 24 years, Brazil won. And Parreira was crucified, because according to the 'expertised' he hadn't balls to come up with a more offensive squad.
12 years later, he had that much more offensive squad. And Brazil was easy prey to France. Result? The same bastards who criticized him after putting Brazil in the top rank of WC trophies asking for a more 'eye candy' team, now crushed him for giving them what they wanted all alon.
Now let's come down to Dunga. His profile, his results as a coach are EXCELLENT. Fact. No question about it. But people are still unsatisfied. And last night, in the press conference aftter the match against The Drogba's Friends Team, he swore - audible - on a journalist who apparently disagreed about something he said, nodding, as someone here pointed out.
Let me tell about this journalist. He's a pain the ass. His name is Alex Escobar, he's from Rio de Janeiro where every goddamn person there thinks that knows EVERYTHING about football. About playing, about coaching, EVERYTHING. And I'm probably not wrong but there are no 'cariocas' (people from Rio) in Dunga's team. He has severely and frequently beated up Dunga in his blog and column since he decided for the 23 to Africa.
In '97, Scolari was Palmeiras' coach and a 'smart' journalist tried to pull a funny interview with him, full of ironies about his work. No negotation: Scolari punched him straight in the chin. It was stupid because the guy became even more famous after that. Two years before, '95, Flamengo and Gremio were semifinalists in Brazil's Cup. Ex-Madrid's Luxemburgo coached Flamengo. He started pressuring the referee. No negotiation: Scolari, who coached Gremio, punched him twice in the face. Luxemburgo is carioca, btw.
I'm not a violence appreciator or endorse it but some people EARN it. And in the case of the moronic media people, either they're just smart ones, trying to step on some coach's back or cariocas with a mic, I find no guilty at all. They want to tease a guy until he breaks and they'll brag about it. And if the teased one wants to argue using the voice of reason, the answer is simple: 'the football needs the media'.
BULLCRAP. The media needs football. I'm done with snob journalists who really think they can control facts and football like puppet masters. The fans DON'T WANT YOUR OPINION, MORONS. They want dribbling, efforts, endurance, beauty, flair, goals. This is what the guardless bloody consumers of the poop you come up with really need, not your poop at all.
I'll support and admire Dunga forever even if he loses this Cup. This is exactly what a coach should do: competence, hard work and a unshakeable stand. No one can move him because he knows what he does and he truly believes it.
It's a time of fake gentlemanship, of 'sensitivity'. We're living and watching times of sweet arrogance, disguised among words and paragraphs. Passive agressive atitudes which can't be answered in the same level because in that case, and solely that case, it's unpolite.
I'm not gaucho, (from Brazil's south region) but I totally understand what these guys go through. And as for Scolari, people pick on Dunga for that reason, they're both Gauchos - specially cariocas do that. They hate the gaucho's pride about his land and his way of playing football - much more focused on marking and tactics rather than improvise and skill.
Now can a journalist bring it in his pocked when he interviews someone? Can he carry his 'clubism' when he's talking about football in general, when he gives opinions? Since a 'media professional' has his own space - facebooks, blogs, tweeters - is he allowed to talk about football in the way he wants, even with partiality? If he does, do you think that isn't dangerous to the point of influencing his opinions when the context allows no partiality at all? I'll let you say.
