有一种观点,认为中国足球改革取得的成绩与其巨大的付出并不相符,投入和产出的比例失调。对此,固然可以仁者见仁,智者见智。但倘若将这个观点用在我们聘请洋教练的得与失上,可以说是名副其实。 随着松日队成绩的不断下跌,维尔纳被炒鱿鱼似乎是一件顺理成章的事,也并未在足坛引起多强烈的震动。这至少说明,公众和舆论界对洋教练的聘与辞,巳经有了一种成热的心态,一种正常的反应。这是好事。 但如果仅此而已,则实在无法抵销我们为此而付出的一笔又一笔昂贵的“学费”。 自80年代以来,中国足坛的“洋务运动”方兴未艾。在我们聘请的外籍教练中,“中央”的有施拉普纳(国家队)、鲁迪、拉德(国奥队)、内波姆尼亚奇(国少队),“地方”上有维 There is a view that the achievements made in the reform of China’s football do not match with its enormous contribution and the imbalance between input and output. In this regard, although benevolent see benevolence, wise see the wisdom. However, if this view is used in our hiring ocean managers gain and loss, can be said to be true. With the team’s declining scores, Werner was fired seems to be a matter of course, did not cause more intense shock in the football. This at least shows that the public and the media have already had a hot attitude and a normal reaction to the appointment of foreign coaches. This is a good thing. But if that’s the case, then it will not be able to offset the expensive “tuition fees” that we paid for this purpose. Since the 1980s, the “Westernization Movement” of Chinese football has been on the rise. Among the foreign coaches we employ, there are “Central” Schlappner (national team), Rudy, Ladd (Olympic team), Nepomniacki (national team), “local” dimension