The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion
The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion |
| Fear of failure prohibits flowing football Posted: 04 Jul 2011 05:12 PM PDT JULY 5 — The opening weekend of potentially the most explosive and entertaining tournament in world football, Copa America, went off with barely a whimper as a somewhat less than grand total of just three goals were scored in the opening four games. Hosts Argentina were the first side to suffer from slow start syndrome, requiring a late levelling goal from Atletico Madrid striker Sergio Aguero to rescue a 1-1 draw against unfancied Bolivia. In the same group, Colombia got off to a winning start by defeating Costa Rica 1-0, but Sunday's pair of matches failed to yield a single goal as Paraguay played out a stalemate with Ecuador and Brazil's samba superstars did the same against rank outsiders Venezuela. Argentina and Brazil fans shouldn't be too worried; the opening group games of major tournaments are all-too-often stale and lifeless encounters and there's plenty of time for proceedings to explode into life — especially when the big guns (Argentina, Brazil, Mexico and Uruguay) start going head to head in the later rounds. The reason that the early stages of tournaments are generally characterised by cautious, defensive tactics is easily identifiable: a fear of failure. Although victory is self-evidently preferable, a draw is a perfectly acceptable result from an opening group game. With a point on the board, for example, Argentina and Brazil now know that one victory from their remaining two games should be enough to secure their passage into the next round. The only imperative in a group opener is to avoid defeat. Zero points after the first game hugely intensifies the pressure for the remaining two fixtures, which all of a sudden become "must win" rather than "would be nice to win." One point might not be as good as three, but it's a whole lot better than none. The fear of losing therefore shapes a team's mental priorities as they prepare for their first group game. Losing is simply unthinkable. Winning is great if you can, but not worth the risk of losing. Therefore the standard approach becomes one of taking no chances, hoping to sneak a victory but being more than prepared to settle for a draw if necessary. To illustrate the habitual closeness of these early group fixtures, in last year's World Cup Finals only three of the 16 opening group games were settled by more than one goal. In a climate of fear, it's no surprise that the footballing fare on offer is largely low on chances and goals. Anybody who has played any sport, or for that matter given a "live" performance in any context (theatre, music, even business presentations) will intuitively know that it's impossible to produce your highest possible level of performance if you become overwhelmed by tension. A certain level of nerves is positive — they can help us feel alert and sharpen our focus. But when nerves are overtaken by the iron grip of fear, our level of performance is bound to drop as we revert to a safety-first mode of mistake avoidance. As human beings, we're at our best when we're ascending towards a specified target with a furious focus that is simultaneously both intense and relaxed. This is the "zone" that sportsman often refer to: a place where concentration is easily maintained, performance flows naturally, without any need for mental consideration, and good things just seem to happen. Attaining such a state of mind – "getting into the zone" – largely stems from feeling justifiable confidence in your own ability and physical readiness, but it is a feeling that cannot be manufactured. However, throwing a pinch of fear into the mix is an almost guaranteed method of making it disappear. So, perhaps the best thing that a coach or manager can do, when preparing his team for a big game, is to relieve the pressure as much as possible. Forget attempting to instil focus and discipline by repeatedly reinforcing the magnitude of the impending moment — the players already know that — and instead keep them relaxed, let them smile, make them laugh. That was an approach regularly adopted by the late and legendary Brian Clough, who turned Nottingham Forest from second division also-rans into English and European champions in the late 1970s despite minimal financial investment. On the eve of one big game, a League Cup Final at Wembley against Southampton in 1979, Clough sensed an atmosphere of growing tension amongst his players and responded by calling a team meeting, wheeling in a crate of champagne and announcing that nobody could go to bed until it had all been finished. Forest's nerves disappeared in a cloud of alcohol-induced merriment, a relaxed frame of mind returned, and they won the following day's final. Perhaps in these more health conscious days it wouldn't be wise to condone such a drastic approach to banishing fear, but the point is clear. When footballers are first and foremost afraid of losing, they tighten up, play within themselves, focus on avoiding mistakes and fail to find their natural, flowing rhythm. That's what we're witnessing in Argentina at the moment. Soon, though, a draw won't be quite good enough and the mental focus will turn towards winning, rather than avoiding defeat. And that's when it will get interesting. * The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist. Full Feed Generated by Get Full RSS, sponsored by USA Best Price. |
| Posted: 04 Jul 2011 05:01 PM PDT JULY 5 — Singapore is known as a strict and inflexible country. Malaysians like to make fun of Singa"bore" and its rigidity, laws, and uptight way of doing things — not be mention cockiness. But is it really deserving of such labelling? I will never forget one Malaysian cabbie who told me he hated Singapore. I was thinking it was likely because of the aforementioned factors, but I could never have guessed his ultimate reason: "In Malaysia if I want to throw (he made a gesture like he was throwing garbage out his window) I throw. In Singapore, cannotlah." This reason seemed strange. Obviously this man and his friends have been happy "throwing" all over the Klang Valley. Just look at the gutters! After three years living here, it seems to me that Malaysia is flexible and inflexible in many ways which hold the country back. I think this situation is primarily due to a lack of emphasis on the importance of critical thinking. For example, recently my friend wanted to swim in his condo's pool. He went down to the empty pool, dipped in, and was suddenly startled by a shrieking whistle. A security guard rushed over, looking at him as though he had just murdered Mother Teresa. "Your shorts are too long" he said. My friend was confused as he was wearing swimming shorts. The guard said they must be "above the knee." For women, no bikinis were allowed, but full bathing suits were fine. Basically, the pool rules were that men need to wear less clothing and women to wear more. My friend's protest was pointless, as rules are rules. Speaking of clothing, I had an overseas friend visiting and I wanted to show him around. I chose a club near where I live. When we went to enter we were stopped by the bouncer. I was perplexed as I was wearing a dress shirt and dress shoes. He pointed at a small rip in my pants and said "cannot." Meanwhile, guys in "fashionable" cut off shorts were allowed in. A much more embarrassing example happened at the Singapore border in a rental car. After getting our passports stamped we came to an automated gate in front of us with a Touch and Go sign — but no place to pay (unlike every single toll booth in Malaysia). We didn't have a Touch and Go Card. The line behind us at Customs was getting restless — and soon they were wildly honking. I got out of the car, and a few women were sitting in the office. I said, "Can we pay?" She said, "Cannot. Touch and Go only. This is Malaysia, we use Touch and Go." So, instead of realising our situation and letting us pay, we had to hold up the whole line while one of us ran over to the store and purchased a card. I understand that these people in the above examples are just doing their respective jobs. They have been given strict orders and are following them well. However, I think critical thinking, if not common sense, is not valued. Consequently, people are not allowed to act independently. Sometimes people are flexible, but for the wrong reasons. For instance, one of my colleagues picked up a helmetless friend while riding his motorbike at night. The police happened to be at the next traffic light. The officers told them to pull over, and asked for documentation. My friend had none. The police, being flexible, allowed my friend to drive home to get identification while the helmetless individual waited with the police roadside. My friend does not have a Malaysian licence, but neither do a number of other scooter-riding expats I know, but no one has ever had a problem. Once my friend got back, the helmetless individual was standing there alone. The police simply got impatient and left her asking her to give my friend a warning. These minor instances of improper inflexibility and flexibility add up. For example, people are born into a religion and can't leave it. In order to be prime minister, one must be a certain sex and race. Unlike most countries, the death penalty is in use. Movies and books can't do this and that, the Internet is becoming more and more censored, and gathering to express an opinion in public is "illegal", a "riot" or "seditious." On July 9th, we will likely see Malaysia's inflexibility in handling a group of people calling for electoral reforms. I read their demands, none of which seem seditious. Bersih 2.0 (http://bersih.org/) demonstrates "people power" and "critical thinking." When concerned Malaysian citizens peacefully take to the streets, I am guessing the authorities and mainstream press will justify harsh action by saying how these activists are disturbing the "peace." I believe we should not be flexible regarding the important things, such as health, human rights, and safety. It is the inconsequential areas of life where we should allow people to be flexible — which will further discussion, happiness, and overall cooperation and peace. Having a bunch of inflexible rule-following citizens is good for a manufacturing-based society. However, as Malaysia develops and puts more emphasis on services — flexibility will become increasingly important. As societies develop in more ways than just economics, our standards should change. Obviously Malaysia is not the only country with such issues. I am focusing on it because this is where I live. My step-father told me a story of his friend being pulled over while driving drunk in Canada around 50 years ago. The police officer told him to get out of the car. Once he opened the door and went to stand up, he fell flat on his face. Instead of arresting the drunkard, the police officer picked him up, sat him in the back in the car, and after a short discussion of why "drinking and driving is not a good idea told the inebriated individual to "drive home safely." If this incident happened today, it would be goodbye licence and car, a huge fine and possible jail time. Things change, often for the better. * The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist. Full Feed Generated by Get Full RSS, sponsored by USA Best Price. |
| You are subscribed to email updates from The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan