Conflicts everywhere – VG

Important words about unity and community are not lacking in the Norwegian Football Association’s attempts to build an image. The chosen language sounds really good, and now it fills rows of empty benches in Ullevaal Stadium with white writing on a red background.

But what is really starting to become a growing problem is that the relationship between life and learning is not exactly working optimally. Are we talking about “stronger together” when the ability to resolve conflicts seems to be lacking in not just one, but three central national teams?

Sure, the cases are different, but nevertheless it is interesting that both the men’s team, the women’s team and the under-21 team are in conflict in which no constructive results have been found.

The dispute between Lars Lagerbäck and Alexander Sørloth was, of course, more difficult to handle as a result of the VG reveal that made the whole thing public. But instead of spending energy on letting people know what happened, it would be more appropriate to focus on analyzing why it escalated and how progressive thinking can become constructive rather than destructive.

From what we know of the case so far, it is obvious that both Sørloth and Lagerbäck have behaved reprehensibly. But what is still unclear is how big the internal gap in the environment really is. Lagerbäck says in the press release that a player as central as Sørloth has expressed that he believes the boss and Per Joar Hansen are “incompetent as coaches both in terms of management and football.” This is now disputed by Sørloth.

Regardless of who is here, the administration potentially has a bigger problem than what has occurred thus far. In that case, we are far from the mutual trust necessary to be close to a world where one is “stronger together” with the flag on the chest. On Thursday night, Sørloth came on the scene and his message shows that this case is almost dead. In particular, the NFF appears to state in the press release that Alexander Sørløth “himself does not wish to comment further on the matter”. That was not true. How on earth can the association believe that they are in a position to say something like that on behalf of an adult, if it has not been clarified to them? Stronger together? I don’t think so, no.

To the women’s team. It has been more than three years since one of the best footballers in the world said no to Norway at the age of 22. It was a direct consequence of what she perceived, and perceives, as a reprehensible treatment of how women are treated by the Football Association, compared to men. As in the male case that is now pending, there is something in the saying “it takes two to tango”, but no matter who was to blame for what, it is tragic that it was not possible for Ada Hegerberg and the direction of the national team find a way to strengthen them together. rather than the best option to be out of the community.

In the U21 team it was reduced last year, when the trio Tobias Heintz, Rafik Zekhnini and Dennis Johnsen announced that they would not be with more. Cause: coach Leif Gunnar Smerud.

The three felt unfairly accused of having formed “a team within the team” in the U21 squad and believed that the manager had created divisions and acidified the atmosphere. The version of NFF, for its part, was that the players “over time have had problems meeting the requirements and expectations that have been placed on the players of the national team.” No matter what one may think about the behavior of the different parties in this dispute, there is one thing that the conflict does not illustrate: that one stands stronger together.

In their own way, these cases say something about an interesting phenomenon from a management perspective, which is how demanding it is to lead a national team.

There is a huge difference between the workspace of a national team manager and the relational preconditions that a leader has for people he meets every day.

A national team manager has short, compressed time slots with a selected group, where the performance pressure is great and the patience of the environment is small.

So what type of leadership style is the most acceptable?

The authoritarian or the most egalitarian?

Greater emphasis on dialogue or discipline?

No matter where you line up on this scale, it’s very easy to make a mistake. Precisely the human follow-up of ambitious individuals is one of the most demanding.

It’s a stumbling block for a performance group if the players are feeling cowed, and a national team hardly performs optimally if it lacks ceiling height to ventilate the sights. At the same time, a coach depends on an authority. Work doesn’t work without a basic respect among players for who ultimately decides, and the growth of subcultures in the locker room is always something a coach will fear. Consequently, here is an extremely demanding balancing act, and the road is short from the fact that it is evolving to break opinions to the fact that it becomes destructive to go in different directions.

In the men’s national team, there is still the opportunity to use a difficult situation for something that everyone can grow into, but it requires parts that are old enough to speak properly and get to the bottom of it. And right now we are far from there, because Alexander Sørloth does not seem interested in participating in any image construction assumed on a failed basis.

If something is meant by saying that Norway benefits from being ‘stronger together’, the words must be full of content to have any value.

Both here and there.