Shouldn't representing your country be the ultimate honour?

Kris Boyd this week decided to end his international career with Scotland – at least while George Burley, the current manager, was at the helm. Having often been left on the bench at club level, the Rangers striker became frustrated at getting a similar lack of opportunity on the international stage and opted to walk away.

Boyd's actions are not an uncommon occurrence. Jamie Carragher decided he no longer wanted to play for England when he was continually being overlooked, first by Sven-Goran Eriksson and then Steve McClaren, while Paul Scholes decided he could prolong his club career with Manchester United – the thing that mattered most to him – by spurning any advances from the Three Lions.

Which brings us to the inevitable question: should representing your country not be the ultimate honour?Does international football matter so little these days with the profile of club football seemingly growing more powerful as each season goes by?

Do you side with Boyd – if you are turning up just to be left on the bench time after time is it better to come clean and vent your frustrations, or should you toe the party line, keep quiet and be happy with just being called up for your national squad?

What do you think? Please leave us a comment below.

Comments

[Andrew]

To bring back the argument to a more general nature - why do we insist on generalising and projecting our views onto players? People have different value systems that lead them to determine their own goals. Players have the right, as individuals, to make their own choices in life. Why do we need to judge them if their decisions are not what we would have done in their place? They can and should do what is right for them - not for the rest of us. (Unless we are talking about Mark Viduka coming back to play for Australia...the moral rightness of that issue is a given.)

[Steve]

very simple in my mind... first of all none of the players should get paid for representing their country. It is an honor, nothing less and if the guys are not prepared to turn out without financial compensation how can we on the terraces expect to see 100% commitment?

As for those who are not good enough to play for their country they should just get over it and those that believe they are so good they should choose the position they play in... the TEAM is better of without them...

[Shug]

Boyd should never play for Scotland again. He says he'll be open to selection for the next manger but why would that manager want him? Boyd is effectively holding a gun to his head: play me or I walk. No manager worth his salt would put up with that.

Scholes and Carragher at least had the guts to retire completely from international, making it very clear they wouldn't come back.

[sam]

its his life, his choice, he can do whatever he pleases within the laws of the land...

[AlMacd]

Alot of these comments are going on about Boyd not being as good as he believes, well if thats the case why are we even discussing it?

If Iwoolymissanopengoaliemoo chucked it, would we care. Nope. Why? Because in the kindest Glasweigan terms "he's pish".

Boyd on the other hand is a predator, he thrives on balls into the box. Give him chances and he'll deliver.

I agree that if a player at my club says I don't want to play for you anymore then, goodbye, don't darken our door again. But in all honesty can we let Boyd walk away from this one?

I think GB was wrong to leave him out. I think Boyd has good reason to complain. But this is the wrong way to do things. If he really doesnt want to play for Scotland, fair enough go. But if he does he should stay and fight for his place and show GB that he is our best striker since McCoist.

On another note, Pressley was brought in to bridge the gap between players and staff. If stories at the weekend of disharmony in the camp are to be believed he clearly isn't managing too well in his job.

[Liam]

I think Boyd is a disgrace for what he has said it's disrepectful to his country but too be honest I don't really care for Scottish football.

However the Carragher and Scholes situations are totally different. Carragher was being overlooked at centre-half even when Terry or Rio were injured or suspended for example Euro 2004 v France he was left out and replaced by Ledley King which was outrageous given where King was at the time with Spurs then unfortunately King went and played a stormer and jumped ahead of him in the pecking order.

Scholes sutuation is different again he was and in my opinion still is the most gifted centre-mid in England and was being overlooked for Lampard, don't get me wrong Lampard was on fire at the time but I think Scholes would have rather been a sub than played on the left where he was uncomfortable and unhappy and then he was being questioned for his performances by the media and fans and now look at him he has been asked to return in for England and play in wouldn't you know it Centre Mid.

[rocboy]

if he refused to play for his country for lacking playing time wander if he is going to quit rangers for being constantly dropped,that is if its for footballing reasons,he should take a leaf out of beckham pages and see fruits of hardwork Boyddy bottler!!!

[O sole mio]

Of course Boyd is wrong. As we Scots say, he's acting like a wee wean. How can he expect to represent his country and he can't even get a game for his club? No player is bigger than the team and no player can ever presume to be picked for his country. It is an honour to be won and cherished.

[Davy Broon]

Absolutely not. He is behaving like a spoilt child. Every manager he has ever played for has had reservations regarding his attitude and his fitness. They cant all be wrong. At Rangers he is continually dropped for important games...why is that? Burley has made some mistakes in his tenure without doubt but I am proud of how he's dealing with this imbecile.

[D Craig]

The two separate issues are that of GB not using a third sub (probably Boyd) and Boyd's INSTANT reaction to not getting a start of any kind.
GB did make a tactical mistake(s)and the 3rd sub issue compounded an already poor tactical first half.
Boyd's reaction by coming out immediately after the game (rumoured a the time confirmed on the Sunday) and announcing his unavailability for future Scotland caps under GB smacks of petulance and un-professionalism. In my opinion he should have cooled off and thought of his position in relation the potential damage he may cause to his career. He has a personality problem per say and this time with GB. He cannot develop as a player to any kind of full potential if he allows his mood to dictate. If we allow to imagine it were another manager with any clout who made such a decision on a player (lets use Stein) would he be so quick to try and undermine?

[John]

The three cases are different. Both Carragher and Scholes retired when they couldn't get selected in their favoured position. Carragher could not get in the team at centre back and was sick of being a utility reserve at left back/right back/defensive midfield. Scholes threw his toys out of the pram when asked to play on the left of midfield and not through the middle. The difference is that Scholes was an automatic first team selection, Carragher had never broken into the side and believed that he would never be given a proper chance to. Scholes was beint petulant.

Boyd is sulking because nobody else thinks he's as good as he does.

[Salmon]

Kris Boyd would do well to remember that players are invited to play for their country. It is not a right to play, it is a privilege. He should be honoured to even be involved with the Scotland set-up and should be grateful for every minute he gets (or doesn’t get) on the pitch.

Only 11 players can be on the pitch at one time and there is competition for places up front. Why should Kris Boyd be selected ahead of any other forward in the game? His attitude is not only disrespectful to Scotland but also his team-mates.

Kris Boyd enjoys a reputation of being a lazy player in the SPL. Yes, he scores goals but does not contribute as much to overall play. This act of petulance exemplifies that lackadaisical attitude of not pulling his weight.

Would such an act of petulance go un-punished at club level?

[Timothy Tanner]

It should be, there are legitimate reasons to retire (Lampard has had reasons but kept going to defy the boo boys) when, like Makele you have given years of service but are in decline, there is talent behind you to fill the gap and you want to bow out on a high. Or in protest about something your FA has done.

However just because your not being picked? Pathetic. International football is a way of giving something back to the game, the FA has to pay (stadium aside) referee's, helping improve youth football, training for coaches, charities, ensuring the England C side can play, attempts to reform the woman's game and make it more equal, running disabled football and a league for the homeless plus the ususal amutar leagues that needs refs, administrators, looking after.

Maybe the likes of Boyd and Carragher need reminding that their countries doing well gives them a better chance of more money to put towards such things. That once little teams have been able to reform their youth system thanks to money gained from internationals. Maybe journalists should ask them questions, every session they can, on why those players don't think they should help with any of this?

[Gavin]

Shearer also retired from Internationals to prolong his Newcastle career. I think the 3 cases cited are all slightly different. With Carragher he felt that he was overlooked, but also that at his age (28 at the time) he felt he was never going to become first choice England centre-back, and that he wanted to prolong his Liverpool career. Scholes just wanted to prolong his club career, both are one club players and think that they may get a couple more years out of their careers with the clubs they love, without International football. Boyd is completely different, he has thrown his toys out of the pram because he wasnt first choice. You could argue that Carragher did the same, but the difference being that Carragher was/is one of the best defenders in the Premier League, and Boyd isnt even first choice for his club. In the end, playing for your country is a great honour, but I believe that club football is what the fans love most and most of the players do too.

[Willis]

This might be true in England... but in very few other places around the world. Enjoy the money.