For some footballing nations, the 2014 FIFA World Cup party is over before it ever really began. By being knocked out during the group qualification stage, the failure to progress sees them packing their bags and taking an early flight home from Brazil.
Returning to face a volley of criticism beneath the media spotlight, many excuses will be trotted out, ranging from poor team selection, player indiscipline and the effects of heat and humidity on older players. I could go on. So I will. Comments made by England’s Wayne Rooney suggest that his country is just too ‘nice’ compared to the ‘nastiness’ displayed by other footballing nations. Perhaps it hints at a collective human trait in that the English are too polite and a little too posh when it comes to pushing for any attention or credit, assuming they’ve earned it of course. A recent report by the UK’s House of Lords Committee suggests that British influence and effectiveness on a shifting world stage requires new methods of exercising power, both in making the use of force (hard power) more effective, and in some instances replacing it with ‘soft power’, which is defined as getting what one wants by influencing other countries to want the same thing through the forces of attraction, persuasion and co-option. Too often, the reputation of a nation’s industry and its power to attract and influence are damaged by negative measures or stances, or by neglect of key assets. In the same way that a defender protects his goal, the effects of an increasingly globalised industry mean that every nation must work hard to protect its manufacturing assets by doing a better job of helping its aerospace primes and SMEs tell their success stories to the world. Mike Richardson, editor
