Say what allyuh want, John on that team.
at this rate we might as well bring back Latapy yes ! where we going wid Stern ?? back to the future ??
If he trains hard and is better than the younger players, why not pick him?
Yuh think Liverpool will have a big game and play Hendedrson instead of Gerrard because they looking to the future? Or Chelsea with Sturidge and McEchrean instead of Drogba and Lampard??
If he not performing, then drop him.........but if he is doing well in training, then the man should play, talk done!!
ah loveit!!
...and he might be better than the young players at this time but when he finally retires he may have retired more young players who gave up serious training because of lack of opportunity. It was the same when he was a young player trying to get a break ...many of us had to make noise for him because he was from El and east ...this is a cycle breds ...lets not continue to moonwalk in our approach to achieving success ....too often we seem to be going forward while sliding backwards ....just so you dont miss the pun ...
Disagree with this big time. If you give up because you didn't get the opportunity you missing the point of what it means to be a professional and what competition is all about.
I agree with you ..but you know what ..many of them do ! Have you never had to talk to a young person who was ready to give up ? I have had many ...all it takes is a little encouragement for them to give of their best. The converse is sadly also true ...all it takes is a little discouragement for them to give up .
Not every athlete is a brian lara who could keep on making centuries while not being selected to the west Indies team .
Let me go back to the original argument ..Stern is neither the present nor the future of Trinidad football but will always be a great contributor to past teams . I therefore do not see his selection to the present national team scenario as a positive move ...
I don't think people are saying he is the present or future, but rather if he shows in training that he is better than the young players they're open to idea of making him the present.
When I think about this argument, it reminds me of Arsenal. You can give young players a chance and let them get more experience from an early age, hoping that they develop into top players. Some will turn out like Fabregas and shine, some will turn out like Senderos and flop. But in order to give them the chance, sometimes Arsenal had to let the Vieira's and Henry's move on. Even though they might still have had something to contribute to the team. In the end they've developed some good talent, but at the same time they haven't won anything in a long time.
So to use it as an analogy for Trinidad, we want to give young players experience but we need to balance that with our desire to win games and qualify for the World Cup. And from what we see, our depth of talent is not sufficient enough that we feel it's worth letting a player like Stern go
IF he has something to contribute to the team. I don't think the argument here is as much about Stern as it is about the principle of the thing.
And you used Dwight Yorke and Hutchinson as examples, but look at Alex Ferguson and a player like Van der Sar. With the amount of young talent in Man Utd squad its arguably more reasonable for Ferguson to let younger players takeover the reigns. But he still keeps the Scholes, Giggs etc around the team and plays them in the big games because sometimes that experience is what you need to win on the day. Just as Sterns experience
MIGHT be what we need to get past a Guatemala or something in a crucial qualifier.
Point is, if he shows that he can contribute he might be useful. It doesn't mean we don't give young players opportunities. That's what friendlies and squad rotation is about. But if you have a young player who gives up because Stern is around he feels like he hasn't been given a chance, then he probably doesn't have the mental strength to succeed as a footballer.