Arnoldgate and Robbie Slater's amnesia

His vituperative column, "Ugly feud flares again", returned salvos in the war of words that erupted last week when my SBS colleagues and I dared criticise Graham Arnold and his selections for the Beijing Olympics.

Now let me start this rejoinder by stating for the record that I am well equipped to talk about Slater because for many intensive months back in the 1990s I worked with him and Matthew Hall on his autobiography, The Hard Way.

This was in the days pre-Frank Lowy, pre-Crawford Report. Slater didn't have a Fox job and at the time he was wondering what the hell he was doing back in Australia. He was dreaming of returning to northern France and his family digs in Lens.

Slater and I subsequently got involved in a lobby group that petitioned Lowy to return to the football fold and ran into each other from time to time at football events. I haven't seen him since the launch of Sydney FC back in 2005 but I consider him a decent bloke, garrulous, funny, good value.

But by god – sorry Benedict – I disagree with him on some issues in football. Have for years. I don't like publicly brawling with Slater but on Sunday he launched a furious tirade at the "so-called experts at SBS" (presumably including me) who are "out to attack" Arnold. (Let's leave aside the salient detail that this blogger and the Half-Time Orange blog was actually born at Fox, where, as a Fox employee from 2006 to 2007, I routinely bagged Arnold and, on occasion, Slater himself. Long-time readers of this blog will be well aware of my work deconstructing the Arnold era.)

The under-23 men's team, Slater quavered, was not a developmental squad. Period.

"It's all about the medal count for the Australian public – not about how it will set us up for the future," he wrote.

"Les Murray, Craig Foster and the others have declared Arnold should be told to select a squad that would be a stepping stone to the Socceroos, rather than a squad aimed at taking a medal."

Really, Robbie? From the tenor of the comments posted on my For the national interest, Arnold's self interest must be reined in, Les's Djite, Burns – pawns in a grubby game and Bash's blogs last week you would think differently. To this uninformed dolt, it appears most of the football-interested public seem to think setting ourselves us up for a good tilt at 2010 and 2014 is more the point.

Slater then aims low: "To suggest he picked his Olympic squad without the input of Socceroos coach Pim Verbeek or FFA technical director Rob Baan shows how out of touch these guys are."

Really, Robbie? Why then, at the original press conference for the naming of the Olyroos squad, did Arnold respond with an unequivocal "no" when asked if the Dutchmen had had any input into the composition of the squad? (Go back to Bash's column Arnie and Pim not on the same page? which started the whole farrago. "Has Verbeek's voice been heard in the selection of Australia's Olympic team? The answer was confirmed by Arnold in one word: No.")

A week on, however, we're being assured by Arnold and his minions he put the squad through more checks than an Indian department store. (While we're on that topic, why was it left to Football Federation Australia's head of corporate affairs Bonita Mersiades to "put on the record" that the squad was developmental and (important caveat) aiming to win a medal? Why couldn't Arnold say so himself?)

But back to Slater. He reserves his most vicious attack on SBS itself, claiming the network, "once the most respected source of all things football in this country… now [relies] on petty, negative attacks in order to make headlines. They are becoming more irrelevant as time goes on. These guys have always had the view that they are the custodians of the game, but those days are over. No-one's saying that they don't have a role to play, they have. There are some very good people doing some good work over there. Unfortunately, the negativity tarnishes that."

Negativity? Is this is the same Slater who bagged the entry of Wellington Phoenix into the A-League, who dumped on Verbeek before he'd even arrived in the country? Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

For what's it worth, the supposedly negative SBS has been a far more consistent advocate of the national coach than Fox Sports could ever claim to be.

And just as equally as we've been supporters of Verbeek, we've been critics of Arnold.

That, when it all boils down to it, is Slater's real bugbear. Not the fact SBS is criticising the Olyroos coach and his squad but because we're criticising his close personal friend. Would he react the same if we were disparaging Verbeek and championing Arnold?

And I would argue SBS if anything, far from being "irrelevant", is more relevant than ever.

Why? Because Australian football needs an independent voice.

Fox Sports does some tremendous work, especially in the televising of the A-League, and though I have my personal views on the free-to-air debate, I respect the professionalism of the Fox organisation. But how can a place call itself the "home of football" and not even have a blog page? Its old blog page on football was one of the most lively parts of the Fox site yet it hasn't had a blog published since April 8.

In contrast, The World Game hosts the liveliest blog page in Australian football where all football fans can throw in their two bob's worth.

And there I will now sign off from this debate. I've said my piece. I'm going to leave the last word to Eagleton of Newcastle who responded to my blog on Friday with these words: "When nobody wanted to give any publicity to football, it was SBS that kept the game going."

How quickly we forget, Robbie. How quickly we forget.