April 29th, 2014

Transformasi tadbir urus bola sepak

Sebaik sahaja Pengurus Manchester United, David Moyes dipecat, saham Manchester United di Bursa Saham New York melonjak naik! Maknanya, pelabur-pelabur memberi reaksi positif ke atas pemecatan Moyes!



Mungkinkah peminat-peminat fanatik Manchester United akan memberi reaksi yang sama? Walau apa pun reaksinya, Manchester United telah gagal memasuki pertandingan Liga Juara-Juara buat pertama kalinya dalam tempoh 19 tahun.

Umum mengetahui, sukan bola sepak menjadi kegilaan penduduk dunia. Tidak keterlaluan dikatakan, bola sepak adalah sukan nombor satu dunia, mengatasi sukan-sukan lain. Malahan, menjadi lubuk untuk sesiapa sahaja mencipta populariti dan kekayaan sama ada para pemain, pengurus, pasukan dan kelab bola sepak.

Real Madrid, Inter Milan, Chelsea, Atletico Madrid, Bayern Munich, Liverpool, Manchester United dan Barcelona merupakan antara nama-nama besar kelab bola sepak dunia. Tatkala ini, semua mata tertumpu kepada empat kelab gergasi bola sepak dunia iaitu, Atletico Madrid, Chelsea, Bayern Munich dan Real Madrid yang sedang memburu kejuaraan Liga Juara-Juara 2013-2014.

Tidak lama lagi seluruh dunia pula akan demam bola sempena Piala Dunia 2014 di Brazil. Kehebatan sukan ini diakui ramai sampaikan ramai pihak boleh membuat keuntungan dalam bisnes bola sepak termasuklah bookie!

Setiap pemain bola sepak mendambakan agar terpilih sebagai pemain bola sepak kelab-kelab ini. Bagaimana kelab-kelab ini boleh berjaya sebegitu hebat? Apakah yang boleh kita ambil iktibar atas kehebatan mereka? Sejauh manakah kehebatan pasukan bola sepak kita sama ada pasukan bola sepak Malaysia, pasukan bola sepak negeri mahupun kelab?

Yang pastinya jurang perbezaan permainan bola sepak para pemain kita terlalu besar berbanding pemain-pemain Eropah dan Amerika Latin. Sampai bilakah baru kita boleh bersaing dengan mereka? Yang pastinya bukan dalam tempoh terdekat.

Apakah silapnya sedangkan suatu ketika dahulu, pasukan bola sepak kita setaraf dengan pasukan Korea Selatan dan Jepun. Untuk rekod, kedua-dua negara ini seringkali layak ke Piala Dunia. Negara kita pula selepas 'tragedi' gejala rasuah bola sepak era 1990an, bola sepak negara melalui zaman gelap.

Walaupun, terdapat tanda-tanda kebangkitan bola sepak kita selepas memenangi Piala AFC Suzuki pada tahun 2010 dan pingat emas Sukan SEA 2009 dan 2011, namun tanda-tanda ini semakin hilang.

Yang jelas kelihatan, penyokong-penyokong bola sepak semakin bersifat "hooligan". Mungkin ini cara mereka meluahkan perasaan ke atas prestasi pasukan bola sepak.

Gejala ini perlu dihentikan agar tidak menjadi barah yang lebih teruk lagi. Salah satu caranya, mentransformasikan tadbir urus sukan bola sepak negara.

Tambahan, pihak kerajaan amat prihatin dengan sukan ini. Buktinya, Akademi Bola Sepak Mokhtar Dahari ditubuhkan.

Di England, akademi bola sepak mereka ditadbir urus dengan baik supaya dapat melahirkan pemain-pemain bertaraf dunia yang berdisiplin dan profesional. Bermula dari kecil lagi, para pemain dibimbing dan dipilih dalam kalangan mereka yang benar-benar berkualiti.

Kita perlu melahirkan pemain-pemain antarabangsa setidak-tidaknya seperti Hidetoshi Nakata dan Park Ji-Sung meskipun amat sukar untuk menghasilkan pemain-pemain seperti Cristiano Ronaldo, Lionel Messi dan Neymar.

Pencarian bakat akar umbi cukup penting. Bakat-bakat muda perlu dipupuk dan diberi peluang seluas-luasnya untuk mencapai taraf pemain antarabangsa. Mereka ini perlu digilap dari awal lagi bak kata pepatah melentur buluh biarlah daripada rebungnya.

Akademi Bola Sepak Negara Mokhtar Dahari perlu ditadbir urus dengan baik. Kita perlu belajar bagaimana kelab-kelab ternama di dunia misalnya kelab bola sepak England yang diketahui mempunyai begitu ramai peminat dan penyokong di seluruh dunia mentadbir urus sukan bola sepak dengan baik.

Ada di antara kelab-kelab ini disenaraikan dalam Bursa Saham London (LSE).

Wang yang diperoleh daripada penajaan, pemegang saham serta aktiviti jualan barangan sukan digunakan sebaik mungkin. Ini bermakna, kelab-kelab bola sepak England beroperasi sebagai sebuah perniagaan. Apabila beroperasi sebagai perniagaan, kelab-kelab ini bertanggungjawab ke atas pemegang saham dan juga para pemain. Tidak kurang juga kepada penyokong-penyokong kelab. Sebab itulah jarang sekali kedengaran gaji para pemain mereka tidak dibayar.

Oleh kerana kelab-kelab bola sepak England beroperasi secara profesional, maka, tadbir urus sangat penting bagi mencorak kejayaan kelab bola sepak.

Sebagai contoh, maklumat ahli lembaga pengarah kelab-kelab bola sepak. Ahli lembaga pengarah sudah semestinya berakauntabiliti terhadap kelab.

Selain itu, kelab bola sepak sentiasa mengadakan dialog dengan para penyokong agar dapat mengemaskini maklumat terbaru mengenai kelab. Ini salah satu cara untuk menjaga dan melindungi kepentingan para penyokong.

Bagi ahli lembaga pengarah yang baharu dilantik, mereka akan diberi latihan dan induksi mengenai kelab. Latihan yang terkini diberikan kepada mereka bersesuaian dengan keadaan semasa permainan bola sepak.

Bahkan, terdapat proses menilai prestasi keberkesanan setiap ahli lembaga pengarah. Proses penilaian ini penting bagi melihat sejauh manakah keberkesanan prestasi individu ahli lembaga pengarah.

Bagi pihak pengurusan pula, mereka perlu diberi ruang seluas-luasnya untuk melatih para pemain tanpa ada campur tangan pihak ketiga. Mereka yang mengurus kelab dan para pemain pula merupakan mereka yang cukup mahir dalam dunia bola sepak. Manakala, ahli lembaga pengarah pula perlu sentiasa memastikan pasukan dan kelab bertanggungjawab dan telus pada setiap masa.

Yakinilah, sukan bola sepak merupakan bisnes yang amat menguntungkan jika kena pada gayanya. Bisnes menguntungkan ini perlu selari dengan prestasi cemerlang di atas padang.

Maka, elemen tadbir urus merupakan intipati utama kejayaan pasukan dan kelab bola sepak. Dengan amalan tadbir urus yang baik, insya-Allah, kita bukan sahaja akan melihat kejayaan pasukan bola sepak negara di peringkat Asia, bahkan tidak mustahil pasukan bola sepak negara mampu mencipta sejarah buat pertama kalinya memasuki Pusingan Akhir Piala Dunia. Rohami Shafie ialah Pensyarah Kanan Perakaunan dan Kewangan, Kolej Perniagaan, Universiti Utara Malaysia Sintok, Kedah. Utusan Rencana 20140429

Malaysia Agreement is ‘invalid’, breaches international conventions, Kuching forum told

The Malaysia Agreement of 1963, the treaty that brought Sarawak, Sabah, and for a short while Singapore, to form the Federation of Malaysia, is an invalid agreement, a forum here heard.

The forum on the Malaysia Agreement in Kuching was also told that Malaysia had started out as an “equal partnership” but had now turned to a “take-over project” by Putrajaya.

A former deputy minister also told the forum to take its case to courts in the United Kingdom as the agreement was brokered by the British.


Malaysia Agreement is ‘invalid’, breaches international conventions, Kuching forum … Hero or Traitor ?
Robert Pei, a Sarawak-born lawyer now practising in Australia, said the Malaysia Agreement was “void ab initio” - a Latin legal phrase meaning it was not valid from the start - as it was not made in compliance with the established principles and rules of international laws like the Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties (VCLT), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1946 and the United Nations Decolonisation Declaration of 1960 (UNDD).

He said the Malaysia Agreement:


  • breached established customary international law that only sovereign states could enter into international treaties;

  • violated Article 5 of the UNDD when Britain was in breach of its 1946 Cession treaty with then independent Sarawak Brooke government to restore independence to Sarawak;

  • violated Article 7 of the UNDD as there was no referendum;

  • violated Article 4 of the UNDD and Article 52 of VCLT, when Britain and Malaya jointly used armed force and repression to coerce the Borneo states into Malaysia under cover of quelling the Brunei Uprising in 1962 and the guerrilla independence war.

“The British repression and suppression of pro-independence Sarawak nationalists was not just a violation of the UNDD but it was a major violation of human rights under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948,” Pei added.

“On its very face, the MA63 document displayed a fatal and fundamental flaw.

On the “established principle” of international law that only sovereign states could enter into valid agreements with other states, Pei pointed out the then North Borneo (now Sabah) and Sarawak were not sovereign states on July 9, 1963 when the Malaysia Agreement was signed and therefore had no legal standings to sign the agreement.

“The Malaysia Agreement, registered as an international treaty with the United Nations in 1973, was purportedly made between five 'sovereign states' - the United Kingdom, Malayan Federation, Singapore with North Borneo and Sarawak on July 9, 1963."

He said as North Borneo and Sarawak were still colonies and therefore has no independent international representation, and its top-level administration is under direct control of the metropolitan state that owns the colony, the agreement was actually entered into between only two independent sovereign states, the United Kingdom and Malaya.

Pei then posed the question: “So is the MA63 (Malaysia Agreement 1963) really about the de-colonisation of North Borneo and Sarawak or just a vehicle for re-colonisation by the new colonial master – Malaya?”

He believed in the latter, saying Malaya had “colluded and pre-determined with Britain to form Malaysia to re-colonize the Borneo territories”.

He also said the MA63 was invalid and was abrogated by Singapore's separation and independence from Malaysia in 1965.

“An international treaty could not be changed without the agreement and consent of all the parties.

“The bilateral Singapore Separation agreement between Singapore and Malaya in 1965 was made without active involvement of the other three signatory parties... and it basically changed the concept of Malaysia which should have been re-negotiated.”

The chief of Sabah-based party Star and Bingkor state assemblyman, Datuk Dr Jeffrey Kitingan (pic, left), concurred with Pei's view that what started as “equal partners” had now turned to a “take-over project” by Putrajaya.

Kitingan, who has been critical of the erosion of Sabah and Sarawak rights in the Malaysia Agreement, cited issues like religion, 'Project IC' and the plundering of the states' mineral wealth, failure to implement the Borneosation of the civil service, and the position of indigenous people in favour of the Malays as the “federal play to re-colonise Sabah”.

Hindraf chairman, P. Waythamoorthy, who was specifically invited to share his experience in taking Hindraf's case to the courts in the United Kingdom, said Sabah and Sarawak can also take their right for self-determination to British courts as the British government could be held liable for their current predicament.

“Sue Britain and hold them liable for compelling Sabah and Sarawak into the Malaysia Agreement and seek a declaration in the UK court that the MA63 is null and void,” the former deputy minister said.

Waytha however warned that such a legal fight would be long and “would not be easy”.

Sharing his experience in taking the plight of Malaysian Indians to the British court, Waytha said he is willing to assist nationalists in the two Borneo states to take their case to Britain.

“The states of Borneo have the right to self determination, autonomy.

“Culturally, socially, ethnically they are different from Peninsula Malaysia. They have their right to chart their own course,” he said at the forum that also had former Sabah chief minister and president of SAPP, Datuk Seri Yong Teck Lee, and deputy President of Parti Bansa Dayak Sarawak (PBDS) Baru, Patrick Anek Uren, as speakers.

Waytha (pic, right), who once inked a Memorandum of Understanding last year with Barisan Nasional to improve the Indian community, said the British government was not acting in good faith in creating Malaysia because the “UK government was more interested in protecting their strategic defence and economic interests in South-east Asia than the interests of Sabah and Sarawak”.

“UK wanted control of the South China Sea and to maintain its military bases. It needed to protect the sea route up to the Philippines.”

The forum, jointly organised by Sarawak Association for Peoples’ Aspiration (SAPA) and Borneo Heritage Foundation of Sabah (BHF) which Kitingan heads, had some 200 people packed in the conference hall of a local hotel. – April 28, 2014. he Malaysian Insider 2014/04/28

Some Popular Billionaires Who Don’t Have A Degree

There has always been a debate about the relation between the degree one possesses and the level of success he achieves. There are two different school of thoughts where one says university degree has no relation to the amount of wealth you own while the other school of thought has an opposite opinion. We bring to you some billionaires who don’t have a college degree and leave it to you decide which school of thought do you belong to. do let us know what are your thoughts about it by leaving a comment.

student advisor | Easyuni.com – Fri, Apr 11, 2014

Education Backgrounds OF Those Who Have Been Devising The Education Policies Of Malaysia

The education ministry of the country has always been considered as a storehouse of power and is seen as a stepping stone for the future Prime ministers with only Tunku Abdul Razak (1955-57) being an exception. The ministry has always been headed by highly educated people – doctors, lawyers, educationists to specify a few. Looking briefly at the education ministers and their educational backgrounds:


Easyuni.comBy student advisor | Easyuni.comThu, Apr 17, 2014

How do we ensure the Education Blueprint avoids becoming a ‘cargo cult’?

APRIL 28 —  A few weeks ago I attended a public event where a representative from the Ministry of Education gave a powerful and passionate speech about the Malaysian Education Blueprint. One statement really caught my attention: the fact that globally 70 per cent of countries embarking on education reform fail miserably.

The thing that I personally find interesting about the recent wave of global reforms is that the strategies being used by the majority of the reforming countries (successful and unsuccessful reformers alike) are remarkably similar. They involve rolling out a standardised set of education policies related to teacher training; curriculum reform; uniform and regular student assessment; teacher accountability measures; and decentralisation. Malaysia’s Education Blueprint has also drawn heavily from this playbook.

At first sight it seems a major conundrum that many countries are adopting the same education policies and that some are achieving liftoff, whilst others are crashing spectacularly back to earth. We obviously need to unpick this carefully to make sure Malaysia is a success story.

Back in 1974 the Nobel Prize winning physicist Richard Feynman told the story of Tanna Island in the pacific, during World War II. A small population of indigenous islanders witnessed thousands of US troops land en-mass with vast amounts of military equipment and supplies.  When the war ended, the military abandoned the airbases and stopped dropping the cargo. The islanders were utterly distraught and longed for the now missing supplies.

They undertook their own in-house ‘management consultancy’ and concluded that if they could replicate the conditions that existed when the Americans were on the island, the cargo would start being airdropped again. They set about creating runways, picked their strongest men to march up and down these ‘airbases’ and fashioned radio headphones from coconuts. One islander donned the ‘headphones’ and played the role of air traffic controller, guiding the planes in.

The Tanna Islanders successfully replicated most of the features of island life during the American occupation but unsurprisingly the planes still didn’t come back. Feynman called the phenomenon Cargo Cult Science, which has become a widely used term to describe situations were organisations try to make improvements by copying the features of another successful reference group but they get it spectacularly wrong – by focusing only on the irrelevant features.

I think there are education reform parallels to this story and maybe even a few countries that have gone down the path of cargo cult education reform. It would explain why so many countries adopt similar reform policies with varying degrees of success – because there is some other hidden wiring in the strategies of successful reformers that seriously gets lost in translation. It’s really important that Malaysia avoids this.

In CfTB’s experience, one of the common reasons for failure in Cargo Cult Education is that the reforms stop at the classroom door. Everything gets reformed, except the micro interactions between student and teacher inside the classroom. But it’s easy to understand why policymakers focus their reform efforts outside the classroom. Things like changing class sizes, the content of exams, the written curriculum, school facilities or the terms and conditions of teachers are a lot easier to achieve than the mindset shift of a single teacher.

Unless policymakers focus on the hidden wiring of the teacher-student relationship and identify the smallest number of high impact initiatives to improve this, reform is unlikely to be successful. Granted, the school buildings will look nice, the curriculum documents will stand up to international scrutiny and the exam system will have been overhauled but the hidden wiring will remain completely untouched. All that will have happened is that like the Tanna Islanders, the education reformers will have built something that looks a bit like a high performing school system but that has none of the really essential features.

So how do we avoid the Cargo Cult approach to access the hidden wiring of Malaysia’s education system and reform it? CfBT Education Malaysia has undertaken a major research project to commemorate our 35th Anniversary and here are five things we uncovered that have value for Malaysia’s reform agenda.

First, telling teachers what to do usually does not work. Improving their practice involves changing their habits and their engrained repertoire of teaching strategies, which is hard.  It is not so hard to get new ideas into teachers’ heads about effective approaches to teaching and learning. The problem is that old habits are hard to break and it takes time for new ideas to crowd out the existing repertoire. It can be done but it certainly does not happen ‘naturally’. 

Second, the key to improving teacher quality is to improve the quality of Continuous Professional Development (CPD). This means moving away from traditional in-service training models where teachers attend workshops and then return to school. The Ebbinghaus Forgetting Curve tells us that just 20 minutes after a traditional training programme has concluded a teacher will have forgotten 42 per cent of what the trainer said. After 31 days, they will only remember 21 per cent and they are only likely to put 10 per cent into practice. This is not a strong return on investment.

Third, the best way to improve the quality of CPD is to base it in the classroom, through a mixture of coaching and teacher learning communities. The cycle involves teachers undertaking training in a new pedagogical approach, making the commitment to trial it in their class and being observed doing so by pedagogy coaches, who provide feedback. Aligned to this, teacher learning communities allow educators to share their experiences and strategies for overcoming challenges. This cycle of reinforcement and the look of enjoyment on the faces of the students will gradually result in the new approaches crowding out the old.

Fourth, it also requires teachers to make a commitment to reflect, continually improve and only focus on what makes a difference to student learning. Leaders also need to make a commitment to create a culture of expectation for improved practice. The focus of school leaders must be on making a difference to students and in providing the time, trust and moral and practical support to enable teachers to experiment and innovate without fear.

Finally, policymakers must acknowledge that the hidden wiring is key. Changing this alone will transform the quality of education, even if all the other areas are left untouched – because they are just Education Cargo Cults, like the Tanna Island runways, which have the style of fundamental reform but none of the substance. — CfBT Education Malaysia

* Dr Arran Hamilton is Director of CfBT Education Malaysia (www.cfbt.com.my), a not-for-profit organisation founded in 1979.

** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malay Mail Online.

Dr Arran Hamilton The Malaymail Opinion What you think April 28, 2014