Is Local Best For National Teams When Appointing Coaches?

Appointing a foreign coach to be in charge of a nation’s international team in today’s sporting world is a common occurrence. To many the appointment is seen a recipe for success, however such a move can in fact be fraught with danger.

Those making the appointment are rarely held accountable for their decisions. The coach, if he fails is replaced and the merry-go-round continues. Do those appointing the next coach learn from the error of their ways?

International sport is a very different beast to club sport, where coaches in most cases have far longer periods of time with their players and therefore can mould a team and a structure of play over time. In addition at club level the coach only has a section of the community interested in their selections and strategies. As an international coach the whole country is interested. The National coach has to not only manage the players, but also the expectations of a nation.

If we go back twenty years to the FIFA World Cup Finals of 1998 in France, 32 nations took part in the tournament. Of those 32 nations only 10 had foreign coaches in charge of their team. All five African teams had overseas coaches, two South American teams in Paraguay and Chile also opted for people outside their country to lead their team, as did Jamaica, Saudi Arabia and the only European nation to do so Denmark. The latter having a Swedish Coach in charge.

Four years later only 9 teams had foreign coaches at the helm at the 2002 FIFA World Cup Finals. In 2018 in Russia 13 National teams were coached by foreigners. In other words 40 percent of the teams had foreigners in charge of their national team.

If we look at the World of Hockey in 2002 only two nations of the 16 were coached by people from outside that nation. Fast forward to 2018 and of the 16 teams playing in India nine were coached by foreign coaches, including the new World Champions Belgium, coached by a New Zealander, Shane McLeod. The first time that this has happened. In this case that is 56 percent of teams were coached by foreign coaches.

In football a foreign coach has never leda team to lift the World Cup. So why do teams persist in appointing foreigners?

After World War II the English FA made a point of sending coaches overseas to try and grow the game, and help other nation’s football develop. George Raynor was a prime example of this move and how successful it was, as he steered Sweden to Gold at the 1948 Olympic Games, and bronze four years later followed by a World Cup final in 1958 where they lost to Brazil 5-2.

Some will tell you that sport has become far more technical since those days, yet the aim in both games is still to score more goals than your opponent. Today, many coaches want to coach overseas as it helps broaden their horizons as a person and a coach, working with players with different skills and motivations. Some head overseas simply because of the money on offer.

Some will tell you that they are forced to go overseas due to limited opportunities in their homelands. In some cases it may be that there is a glut of coaches, in others it may simply be not enough opportunities due to the number of top level teams, and so the only option is to head for foreign lands, make a name for yourself and then return home.

Of course taking up a position with a foreign side comes with a completely new set of challenges. Some of these challenges many of the coaches will be aware of before they take the job, but are those who employ them as aware of all the challenges and the impact they can have on the players playing in the national team?

Some of those challenges are language-related, some are dietary, some are cultural or religious, and others are the way the game has been structured in that country and how national teams and squads are selected. Then there are historical factors to consider, deep set rivalries that the incoming coach may be totally oblivious to.

The best example of this was when Sven Goran Erickson was coach of the England football team when they played Australia at Upton Park in 2003, a game in which Wayne Rooney became the youngest England international at 17yrs and 111 days. Erickson failed to realise how big the rivalry was between both these nations until after the game when his side, or sides as he made 11 changes at half time, lost to Australia 1-3.

Even though Erickson had English assistant coaches he still failed to grasp the importance of the match.

If nations feel that they need that foreign expertise and knowledge there is a lot to be said in many nations to consider having a talented local coach as the head coach. Someone who understands the cultures and the environment, as well as the history. Then have as a Technical Director or Assistant coach the foreign coach; provided that their ego will allow them to take such a role as assistant.

In “A Roll of The Dice” we questioned the decision to bring in Roelant Oltmans as coach of Malaysia Hockey and move the then head coach Stephen van Huizen to be his assistant. In that piece there is a comparison of the two coach’s records over the same period of time.

Oltmans started his tenure well with three wins in the Asian Champions Trophy. Then came a draw with India, a draw and a loss with Pakistan (a shoot out loss in the draw) and a draw with Japan in which they won the shoot out to claim the bronze medal.

Next up was a three Test series with New Zealand which saw the team lose twice and win once. Following that the World cup was disappointing for Malaysian fans and saw the team lose 0-6 to the Netherlands and 3-5 against Germany and draw again with Pakistan this time 1-1..

So in 13 matches since the foreign coach was appointed Malaysia have won four, drawn four and lost five. These results are over a three month period. Some will say that this is too short a period in which to judge, and they may be right, time will tell.

However, before that appointment taking in the Commonwealth Games, two Tests against Argentina and the Asian Games Stephen Van Huizen had seen his team play 14 matches, win nine draw three and lost two. Did the change of coach change the momentum of the team? We will never know.

It does however raise the issue that rather than trying to find a well credentialed foreign coach to take over a national team, there is so much more that needs to be taken into consideration before the team will be successful. National associations need to give more consideration to national identity and culture and what the national team means to the people of that nation, how they view the players and opponents, and their long and short-term expectations.

Looking at the results over two sports over the history of their pinnacle tournaments it is interesting that as the number of foreign coaches has increased we have still only seen one foreigner lead his adopted nation to World Cup success and that only happened in 2018. So should National Associations revert to using local coaches?

(Please note that this only related to the male competitions)