Monk Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/4958591/Gareth-Bales-Southampton-academy-under-threat.html
alpine_saint Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/4958591/Gareth-Bales-Southampton-academy-under-threat.html England already has a dearth of identified talent, as demonstrated by the massively inflated proportion of foreigners in the EPL, and by the performance of the national teams. Go on, bellends at the FA, make matters worse by cutting the knees off of the currently most successful youth programme in the country.... I really wonder about the people who run the game in this country.
wireframebox Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 That's like us complaining about a London club having a satellite academy in Portsmouth?
iansums Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 England already has a dearth of identified talent, as demonstrated by the massively inflated proportion of foreigners in the EPL, and by the performance of the national teams. Go on, bellends at the FA, make matters worse by cutting the knees off of the currently most successful youth programme in the country.... I really wonder about the people who run the game in this country. Why, is it bad in Austria then?
JPTCount Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 Didn't Walcott also come through the Bath satellite..?
teacher Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 Walcott came from just outside Newbury. I think he was with Swindon before saints.
Saint Charlie Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 If that did happen then we will probably need to become more aggressive in acquiring players from around the country leveraging the Cat 1 status. Silly proposal though from the decision makers. If Bristol City want to compete they should improve their setup.
ant Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 Buy the Isle of Wight, ship all of the current residents to Bath and transport all prospects at the satellite academy with their families to our new footballing utopia. Can always extend into The Channel since that's where half of our catchment area is. Job done.
SuperMikey Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 It's time for the next stage - a floating academy site in the middle of the Channel. We can pick up the best of talent from the Channel Islands and the North of France that way.
FloridaMarlin Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 "We can pick up the best of talent from the Channel Islands." Now you're just being stupid. Everybody knows the Channel Islands have never produced a decent player.
Ken Tone Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 To be fair, I suspect we'd have a different view if we were Bristol City fans.
Doctoroncall Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 To be fair, I suspect we'd have a different view if we were Bristol City fans. The supporters should have other priorities than a "rival's" academy really, it's a badly run club, than worry about talent the club would probably screw up anyway!
ant Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 To be fair, I suspect we'd have a different view if we were Bristol City fans. Equally though, shouldn't all teams be able to scout from the same amount of square miles? It's not really fair that the reach of coastal teams is reduced by roughly half.
Ex Ringwood Saint Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 I am sure Portsmouth are happy to search the sea bed for new talent.....
The Kraken Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 Equally though, shouldn't all teams be able to scout from the same amount of square miles? It's not really fair that the reach of coastal teams is reduced by roughly half. Where do you stop? Population size? In terms of location Swansea are at a considerable disadvantage to the major conurbations. The new academy system is already massively loaded in favour of bigger clubs, so Brizzle have got a very fair grievance about us or any other club having a satellite academy in their locale.
VectisSaint Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 "We can pick up the best of talent from the Channel Islands." Now you're just being stupid. Everybody knows the Channel Islands have never produced a decent player. Le Saux was OK
This Charming Man Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 I think it's only fair we should pull out of that area. After all, given the success and all the top class players their academy has brought through over the years I say let them have it.
jasonb Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 Where does it say kids HAVE to chose the Bath academy anyway?? Are they forced to attend this academy?? Surely they chose to go along ?? I don't get the fuss. Nothing to stop Bristol setting up a footballing academy in Brockenhurst is there? OR am I being massively naive and missing some rules somewhere?
The Kraken Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 Where does it say kids HAVE to chose the Bath academy anyway?? Are they forced to attend this academy?? Surely they chose to go along ?? I don't get the fuss. Nothing to stop Bristol setting up a footballing academy in Brockenhurst is there? OR am I being massively naive and missing some rules somewhere? Yes, you've missed the rules. Clubs are typically only allowed to have one academy, based at their home club. And they've previously been limited to only being able attract kids from within a 90 minute driving time. To combat the fact that half our catchment area is the Channel we were allowed an extra satellite academy. It's that right that now could be removed.
benjii Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 Actually a counter-productive attitute from those clubs IMO unless they have aspirations of developing Category One status academies themselves. They would be better off trying to work with us so that those good players which remain local to them due to the satellite arrangements are sent to them on loan etc.. If the centre closes the best players will still join the best academies, they will just have to uproot from the area. Those smaller clubs aren't going to start producing Bale's and flogging them for £10million if we shut the centre down; they will continue to lose them as 15/16 year olds for minimal compensation.
Matthew Le God Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 Yes, you've missed the rules. Clubs are typically only allowed to have one academy, based at their home club. And they've previously been limited to only being able attract kids from within a 90 minute driving time. To combat the fact that half our catchment area is the Channel we were allowed an extra satellite academy. It's that right that now could be removed. Concerning "half our catchment area is in the sea", that can apply to a large number of English clubs. Saints are hardly unique for that.
Fan The Flames Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 What is stopping any club setting up a team in any area, seperate from the club but with an 'informal link', any good talent is then 'transferred' to the mother club.
Colinjb Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 Concerning "half our catchment area is in the sea", that can apply to a large number of English clubs. Saints are hardly unique for that. That has Birmingham City fuming quite frankly.
The9 Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 Surprised to find that the Elite Player rules are actually potentially working AGAINST Saints, when one of the best things about it was meant to be how the Elite Academies like us could trample all over the smaller clubs... "best" from a self-interested perspective, that is. Also surprised to find that MLG hasn't got more of an opinion on this seeing as he's probably the only one on here who's bothered to actually read the rules.
The Kraken Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 Concerning "half our catchment area is in the sea", that can apply to a large number of English clubs. Saints are hardly unique for that. I'm not sure where you've got the idea from that I think we're unique in that respect. We're not at all, and I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the satellite academy withdrawn.
Saint86 Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 I think it's only fair we should pull out of that area. After all, given the success and all the top class players their academy has brought through over the years I say let them have it. There is nothing wrong with the likes of Andy cole, curetan, stewart, Ellington, hales etc... considering the clubs in Bristol are small in stature and struggle to compete rubgy, they have certainly produced some decent players. Don't let that stop you though, please carry on making us look like ignorant "arsenal/man utd, $hitty or chelsea" fans... good job.
simo Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 Tell them to **** off don't they know we are Southampton we do what we want ?
Lallana's Left Peg Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 It was stupid for the FA to allow us to have it in the first place. Going to be quite hard for them to take it away from us now as the reasons for giving to us will never change barring a quite literal massive natural disaster that changes the geography of this country.
The Kraken Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 It was stupid for the FA to allow us to have it in the first place. Going to be quite hard for them to take it away from us now as the reasons for giving to us will never change barring a quite literal massive natural disaster that changes the geography of this country.Not really. As we're a top status academy we're not subject to the 90 minute rule any more, so it would extremely easy to prove that we have a distinct advantage over other clubs by having two academy bases.
stu0x Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 It seems like an utterly perverse interpretation of the rules. The SFC academy is Cat 1. That is down to the facilities, level of coaching, etc. The geographical location of the academy is (quite rightly) not a criteria. So if the Bath centre offers the same level of support as Staplewood, but the only difference is its physical location, surely it is a Cat 1 facility? And therefore you would want to drive youngsters towards it instead of away from it?
The Kraken Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 It seems like an utterly perverse interpretation of the rules. The SFC academy is Cat 1. That is down to the facilities, level of coaching, etc. The geographical location of the academy is (quite rightly) not a criteria. So if the Bath centre offers the same level of support as Staplewood, but the only difference is its physical location, surely it is a Cat 1 facility? And therefore you would want to drive youngsters towards it instead of away from it? So what's the answer if Liverpool say "you know what, Southampton have got a satellite academy; we'd quite like to set one of those up, please"? Is the answer "yes, sure"? Or if its "no", are we allowed to keep ours simply because, well, we've had it for some time now?
Lallana's Left Peg Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 Not really. As we're a top status academy we're not subject to the 90 minute rule any more, so it would extremely easy to prove that we have a distinct advantage over other clubs by having two academy bases. Unless this table is wrong or I've interpreted it incorrectly (both are possible!) then I don't believe the 90min rule is completely abolished at all for all age groups therefore we still gain an advantage by having the Academy there: http://www.footballacademytalk.com/football-league-youth-development-rules-2013/ Particularly for kids in the 'Foundation Phase' where they can only travel for 1hr.
sfcuk fan Posted 7 June, 2013 Posted 7 June, 2013 Buy the Isle of Wight, ship all of the current residents to Bath and . . . . . . . . .. Oy !!! I might need a bath due to my nocturnal dabbling with sheeps parts but that dont mean I wanna move there !!! .
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now