Jump to content

England should follow Southampton


Batman
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

Posted a link to the same article last night. As I said on my thread nice article but pity professional journalists can't do enough research to ensure 'facts' like the Clyne thing are correct.

 

As you say, unlikely to happen, too many clubs out for themselves and the Premier League unlikely to ratify the changes required. Also wonder how much of what's set our academy apart will continue with the new(ish) board in place. Their managerial appointment and summer spending has gone a long way to reassure me they want what's best for the club, but I can't help but feel they've made a few mistakes along the way. I hope that they learn from these and cut them out in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is English football the same as German though? No - they seem to be a lot more pragmatic than us and are more than happy to take a step back to take two steps forward. The German people seem to know that that is happening accept it, and bide their time. We in this country demand instant success and are not prepared to take a step back to rebuild. Maybe given the 20th Century rebuilding of their country, the Germans can see things more clearly. We just seem to flog a dead horse. One of their great strengths is the way the WC winning side played tournament football together at the different ages (U18, U21, U23 and any other), while it seems that U21 is greatly over looked in this country. It is often populated with reserve team players or players from the Championship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you just watch Woy call up Johnson ahead of clyne

and chambers is now a shoe-in, as he has played 3 times for a glory club

I have to agree to a certain extent. Although Hodgson was at least brave enough to acknowledge that we had Lallana, Lambert, Shaw and Rodriguez if he was fit, all capable of being good enough to be selected for England, choosing Clyne or Chambers was step too far if it meant selecting one less player from the glory clubs. Most people would acknowledge that both Clyne and Chambers are better than the has been Johnson, but Hodgson will feel a lot better now that our ex-players are with Liverpool, Man Utd and Arsenal. But we have a couple of years to bring through the next generation for the European Championships, so it will be interesting to see how he reacts to that situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The FA are in actual fact dullards. They spend so much time looking at their own navels that they cannot accept the fact that Germany are light years ahead of good ol Engerrrrland. Probably the main reason I cannot watch the absolutely abismal displays offered up by a team that a, are led by managers with the tactical nous of a dinosaur and b, in the main cannot even trap or control a ball FFS would you employee a Brickie that couldn't handle a trowel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The FA are in actual fact dullards. They spend so much time looking at their own navels that they cannot accept the fact that Germany are light years ahead of good ol Engerrrrland. Probably the main reason I cannot watch the absolutely abismal displays offered up by a team that a, are led by managers with the tactical nous of a dinosaur and b, in the main cannot even trap or control a ball FFS would you employee a Brickie that couldn't handle a trowel.

 

Some say that a lot of it is down to the number of coaches that the respective countries have. The cost of doing the relevant coaching courses in this country and Germany varies hugely.

 

Level 3 B Licence - England £2450 vs Germany €430 (about £344)

Level 4 A Licence - England £5820 vs Germany €530 (about £424)

 

As a result, England has about 1100 A Licence holders and Germany has about 5 times that many. Similarly, Germany has about 5 times the number of Pro Licence holders. Looking at other countries, I think Spain and Holland have even more coaches. So to me, the problems are more fundamental and maybe we have to change things right down at the bottom of the pyramid with kids who are 8 years old. I can't see a quick fix, and if you go with what Germany did, it will take 10 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The FA are in actual fact dullards. They spend so much time looking at their own navels that they cannot accept the fact that Germany are light years ahead of good ol Engerrrrland. Probably the main reason I cannot watch the absolutely abismal displays offered up by a team that a, are led by managers with the tactical nous of a dinosaur and b, in the main cannot even trap or control a ball FFS would you employee a Brickie that couldn't handle a trowel.

 

A complete overhaul of the governing body and we might get somewhere. There are a number of reasons it will never happen though.

Money; those with the power to change the hierarchy (those with money) benefit from the current system, so they're quite happy with football as it is.

Press; Bad news sells. This is caused by the press and the public, so I don't think the blame can be placed squarely at the feet of a few journos. Due to this, if the FA attempt a sea change then they will lambasted for the inevitable short term failure or dip in form. Who cares how it will impact 5 years down the line, I want jam today!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some say that a lot of it is down to the number of coaches that the respective countries have. The cost of doing the relevant coaching courses in this country and Germany varies hugely.

 

Level 3 B Licence - England £2450 vs Germany €430 (about £344)

Level 4 A Licence - England £5820 vs Germany €530 (about £424)

 

As a result, England has about 1100 A Licence holders and Germany has about 5 times that many. Similarly, Germany has about 5 times the number of Pro Licence holders. Looking at other countries, I think Spain and Holland have even more coaches. So to me, the problems are more fundamental and maybe we have to change things right down at the bottom of the pyramid with kids who are 8 years old. I can't see a quick fix, and if you go with what Germany did, it will take 10 years.

 

You won't see me disagreeing with any of that. Until we start putting a huge amount of money into grass roots, coaching etc etc then things will never ever change and good ol Engerrrrland will be where it's been since the 70's. We talk about golden generations time and time again but it's lions led by lambs I'm afraid. I'd be happy if the next England side fielded no one over say 27-28 and had a manager (English or not) who wanted to actually coach his players. Mind you would e big clubs let them play a friendly? I doubt it very much.

 

The whole set up in this country is pathetic (at best). Shamefull for a country that has football as it's national sport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some say that a lot of it is down to the number of coaches that the respective countries have. The cost of doing the relevant coaching courses in this country and Germany varies hugely.

 

Level 3 B Licence - England £2450 vs Germany €430 (about £344)

Level 4 A Licence - England £5820 vs Germany €530 (about £424)

 

As a result, England has about 1100 A Licence holders and Germany has about 5 times that many. Similarly, Germany has about 5 times the number of Pro Licence holders. Looking at other countries, I think Spain and Holland have even more coaches. So to me, the problems are more fundamental and maybe we have to change things right down at the bottom of the pyramid with kids who are 8 years old. I can't see a quick fix, and if you go with what Germany did, it will take 10 years.

 

Great post, well pointed out. With all the TV money around now, a fund to get the required number of coaches trained and qualified would be money well spent and would actually be a PR coup for the Premier League, although probably the truth is that the PL rely on clubs bringing in foreign players so that they can sell the overseas TV rights. With Wembley to pay for the FA would not put the money up, although it is their responsibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Brian Reade should be banned from any journalism again, what is he doing posting a positive article about the Saints ffs???

 

The other couple of differences I would want to add is that: a) I'm not sure of the motivation of the players, is it to win things or the money? and b) they are not used to tournament football which you can see from the attitude of the players and the clubs to the U21 tournament, most cry off and its not as if they're playing 50 games a season!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was saying the "England should follow the Saints approach" thing a year ago, in terms of picking a core of one club's players and building on that, purely due to the limited time for team-building. However, that turned into "actually, looks like Liverpool is a better option" by March/April time and that seed certainly planted itself in the heads of a few Saints players even before they were bypassed in Brazil.

 

In terms of building from the ground up, I see the problems as:

  1. cost of coaching courses which reduces the coaching talent pool and means fewer kids are coached skills at all
  2. lack of similarity between the objectives of the top clubs and the National Team when players get near the top level (make money, stockpile squad depth and keep players for themselves irrespective of stunting their development, adopt a low risk strategy with unproven young players who might lead to short term defeats at the expense of longer term gain).
  3. complete lack of funding for grass roots facilities for the masses who don't get dragged into a club academy at 6 and end up learning from someone's mum or dad on a cabbage patch with no changing facilities, if they learn at all.
  4. Competing sports/leisure interests at an all-time high
  5. Lack of nutrition and physical development information outside the core academies
  6. Less-than-optimum growth/development from food consumption in modern UK society generally
  7. The "September effect", still overlooking kids who aren't 6ft at age 10, late developers, the kids who can't hoof 50 yards or use physical strength etc.

 

to varying degrees, and obviously impacting on both numbers of potential players and the ability to maximise benefit from those who do retain interest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was saying the "England should follow the Saints approach" thing a year ago, in terms of picking a core of one club's players and building on that, purely due to the limited time for team-building. However, that turned into "actually, looks like Liverpool is a better option" by March/April time and that seed certainly planted itself in the heads of a few Saints players even before they were bypassed in Brazil.

 

In terms of building from the ground up, I see the problems as:

  1. cost of coaching courses which reduces the coaching talent pool and means fewer kids are coached skills at all
  2. lack of similarity between the objectives of the top clubs and the National Team when players get near the top level (make money, stockpile squad depth and keep players for themselves irrespective of stunting their development, adopt a low risk strategy with unproven young players who might lead to short term defeats at the expense of longer term gain).
  3. complete lack of funding for grass roots facilities for the masses who don't get dragged into a club academy at 6 and end up learning from someone's mum or dad on a cabbage patch with no changing facilities, if they learn at all.
  4. Competing sports/leisure interests at an all-time high
  5. Lack of nutrition and physical development information outside the core academies
  6. Less-than-optimum growth/development from food consumption in modern UK society generally
  7. The "September effect", still overlooking kids who aren't 6ft at age 10, late developers, the kids who can't hoof 50 yards or use physical strength etc.

 

to varying degrees, and obviously impacting on both numbers of potential players and the ability to maximise benefit from those who do retain interest.

I would also add the sense of entitlement from those who have played at a professional game that they should be able to walk into a top management job with absolutely zero experience and, in many cases, qualifications.

 

Another problem with coaching is that in order to get on the UEFA A and B courses in this country, you pretty much have to already be employed at a club where you are then able to do the requisite practical hours that are required by the course, but for most clubs they want to employ people who already have these qualifications. But of course they'll make an exception if an ex-pro applies because they're a big name and may be able to attract players higher than the club's stature to play for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would also add that the Clubs are not behind the national team, do not care about the national team and would prefer their players not to play for the national team. I realise that this is a problem quite a long way down the line and that there are many other problems to over come before one gets to that stage. But it rather reflects the whole ethos of things. The supporters of the big clubs are more interested in their club side than national side. Those supporters of the not so big clubs also feel this way because they don't want to watch the dross served up by the England team that is (usually) made up of players from the big teams. This WC was slightly different, but the South African one was truly diabolical and it appeared that the players were disinterested. Hell, if they get paid £100k a week by their club, and nothing by their country, where do you expect their loyalties to lie? When I say nothing, I mean very little - what is it - £1500-2500 for a win down to £70 for a loss. A £650k win bonus if we had won the WC? (Could have added a 0 to the end of that and been fairly confident that you wouldn't have to pay out).

 

£750 for a loss - that wouldn't even cover their bar bill, and a player on £100k a week would earn more than that in 90 minutes. There seems little pride in appearing for the national side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would also add that the Clubs are not behind the national team, do not care about the national team and would prefer their players not to play for the national team. I realise that this is a problem quite a long way down the line and that there are many other problems to over come before one gets to that stage. But it rather reflects the whole ethos of things. The supporters of the big clubs are more interested in their club side than national side. Those supporters of the not so big clubs also feel this way because they don't want to watch the dross served up by the England team that is (usually) made up of players from the big teams. This WC was slightly different, but the South African one was truly diabolical and it appeared that the players were disinterested. Hell, if they get paid £100k a week by their club, and nothing by their country, where do you expect their loyalties to lie? When I say nothing, I mean very little - what is it - £1500-2500 for a win down to £70 for a loss. A £650k win bonus if we had won the WC? (Could have added a 0 to the end of that and been fairly confident that you wouldn't have to pay out).

 

£750 for a loss - that wouldn't even cover their bar bill, and a player on £100k a week would earn more than that in 90 minutes. There seems little pride in appearing for the national side.

England players are - in theory - very well paid when on England duty, I think their fees are somewhere in the region of £50k or so, but there is an agreement with the PFA that all of those fees are donated to charity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...