england - the next generation

[moo]

We managed five years in a row without qualifying not so long ago.

We have not only qualified, and not got our main stars out there, but have just drawn against the tournament favourites. Fck me.

[LUX]

I read that we won this twice in a row in 1982 and 1984 (?)

Impressive, but the only players from that team to go on to get a full cap were Mark Hateley and Steve Hodge.

[Hoop Blah]

We managed five years in a row without qualifying not so long ago.

We have not only qualified, and not got our main stars out there, but have just drawn against the tournament favourites. Fck me.

Very true, and in players like Wilshire, McEachran, Rodwell, Cleverly, and from the little I've seen of him Oxlade-Chamberlain, we are producing players who are technical and not just athletes.

[The Rouge]

We managed five years in a row without qualifying not so long ago.

We have not only qualified, and not got our main stars out there, but have just drawn against the tournament favourites. Fck me.

Very true, and in players like Wilshire, McEachran, Rodwell, Cleverly, and from the little I've seen of him Oxlade-Chamberlain, we are producing players who are technical and not just athletes.

True. I would subtract Cleverley from that list and add Sturridge.

[The Rouge]

Couple of RFC fans in the crowd too.

Saw that - they were shown twice just before kick off. Good work.

[Royal Rother]

Also, don't forget that our u17s are current European Champions having beaten Spain and France in the finals tournament last summer.

Not sure what it means, but France and Germany haven't qualified for these finals. Nor Holland or Italy.

I'm guessing (probably because it fits my argument) but I suspect this might be because the countries who favour teenagers with athleticism, strength and the ability to get up and down the pitch, are going to have an advantage over those who go with (and persevere with) the more technically gifted youngsters. The advantage that gives those teams gradually gets eroded as the physique, strength and stamina factors level out with age and maturity.

U17 football just isn't where it's at.

Out of interest, this was our Team in the 2007 U21 Euro Champs. How many of these have progressed into what one might call technically gifted professionals....

England U21: Carson, Hoyte, Baines, Taylor, Reo-Coker (Huddlestone 87), Richardson (Routledge 82), Nugent, Milner, Lita (Derbyshire 69), Noble, Onuoha.
Subs Not Used: Hart, Alnwick, Ferdinand, Cahill, Rosenior, Vaughan, Whittingham.

And this was our U17 squad in 2004.

Ben Alnwick
Billy Jones
Nathan Ashton
Mark Noble
Ben Parker
Gary Roberts
Shane Paul
Chris James
Fraizer Campbell
James Walker
Kyel Reid
Richard Stearman
Joe Lewis
Nathan Doyle
Simon Walton
David Wheater
Levi Porter
Mark Davies

Only heard of a handful of those.

[Tails]

Oh come on RR. You just come to the same conclusion to different results purely on the basis that it suits your original belief.

Maybe that particular crop just play a better style of football, maybe not. You are falling foul of seeing what you want to see whilst not actually providing a compelling argument.

[Royal Rother]

Did I not admit exactly that in my post?

[Hoop Blah]

We managed five years in a row without qualifying not so long ago.

We have not only qualified, and not got our main stars out there, but have just drawn against the tournament favourites. Fck me.

Very true, and in players like Wilshire, McEachran, Rodwell, Cleverly, and from the little I've seen of him Oxlade-Chamberlain, we are producing players who are technical and not just athletes.

True. I would subtract Cleverley from that list and add Sturridge.

I was going to include Sturridge but he is still an explosive and powerful player as well as having decent technique. His ability to control and keep the ball tonight was poor too, so it was a bit of bad time to include him!

Cleverly didn't have much of an impact but he's by no means an athletic player like a Rose or less so Sinclair (or Antonio to put an RFC perspective on it).

[Tails]

Did I not admit exactly that in my post?

Apologies.

Vindicates me pointing it out then.

[Hoop Blah]

I'm guessing (probably because it fits my argument) but I suspect this might be because the countries who favour teenagers with athleticism, strength and the ability to get up and down the pitch, are going to have an advantage over those who go with (and persevere with) the more technically gifted youngsters. The advantage that gives those teams gradually gets eroded as the physique, strength and stamina factors level out with age and maturity.

U17 football just isn't where it's at.

Out of interest, this was our Team in the 2007 U21 Euro Champs. How many of these have progressed into what one might call technically gifted professionals....

England U21: Carson, Hoyte, Baines, Taylor, Reo-Coker (Huddlestone 87), Richardson (Routledge 82), Nugent, Milner, Lita (Derbyshire 69), Noble, Onuoha.
Subs Not Used: Hart, Alnwick, Ferdinand, Cahill, Rosenior, Vaughan, Whittingham.

There's some pretty decent and technical players in that side to be fair RR. They've not set the world alight by any means but that's because they're not quite good enough, not because they were ever just physical players who've since lost a bit of an edge.

Noble, Richardson, Huddlestone, Baines, Derbyshire and Milner are not and never were the big lad and athletes you alluded to earlier.

Just out of interest, the Spain skipper was a 6ft plus big unit who got around the pitch quite a lot. He was also decent on the ball of course, but he just goes to show even the Spainish are happy to use a physically powerful player if needs be. I can't ever see them playing Antonio though!

[moo]

If one or two players step up from each u21 tourney, all is good.

[Royal Rother]

I'm guessing (probably because it fits my argument) but I suspect this might be because the countries who favour teenagers with athleticism, strength and the ability to get up and down the pitch, are going to have an advantage over those who go with (and persevere with) the more technically gifted youngsters. The advantage that gives those teams gradually gets eroded as the physique, strength and stamina factors level out with age and maturity.

U17 football just isn't where it's at.

Out of interest, this was our Team in the 2007 U21 Euro Champs. How many of these have progressed into what one might call technically gifted professionals....

England U21: Carson, Hoyte, Baines, Taylor, Reo-Coker (Huddlestone 87), Richardson (Routledge 82), Nugent, Milner, Lita (Derbyshire 69), Noble, Onuoha.
Subs Not Used: Hart, Alnwick, Ferdinand, Cahill, Rosenior, Vaughan, Whittingham.

There's some pretty decent and technical players in that side to be fair RR. They've not set the world alight by any means but that's because they're not quite good enough, not because they were ever just physical players who've since lost a bit of an edge.

Noble, Richardson, Huddlestone, Baines, Derbyshire and Milner are not and never were the big lad and athletes you alluded to earlier.

Just out of interest, the Spain skipper was a 6ft plus big unit who got around the pitch quite a lot. He was also decent on the ball of course, but he just goes to show even the Spainish are happy to use a physically powerful player if needs be. I can't ever see them playing Antonio though!

But 4 years ago they were good enough to get to the Semi Finals of the Euros, now I'd suggest only 4 or 5 will be playing regular Premier League football next season.

There has to be a reason for that and I fear that the answer "they just weren't good enough" is the type of excuse the FA have been making for generations. We need to find out WHY they ended up not good enough. What has been handled poorly that resulted in these guys not progressing in the way that should have been expected.

I am suggesting it might be in part because these players were the ones who had allied physical strength and size to natural ability at an early age and naturally came to the top in the English environment. I am not stating it as a fact because I am obviously not close enough to the game to KNOW, but I fear better players than some of the above mentioned never made it because they were rejected at an early age in favour of the bigger guys.

I think we all accept that playing 11 a side at aged 11 (often in full size goals) is a bloody nonsense, but right from that early age, the most valuable players are the big, strong, run-all-day types. If there's a little tubby boy with great skills and a bit of vision, competing for a place alongside a big fit lad with decent enough skills but not as good as the tubby fella, who will get picked? In 7 a side it would probably be Tubby, in 11 a side it's often the runner. We play 11 a side so the more skilfull player might fall be the wayside whereas he was actually the better footballer.

[Seal]

Holland U21 - winners of the 2007 tournament. How many of these guys have made it to the Dutch national team? 4/5 max? Babel is the only one with a signigicant number of caps and I think most people would struggle to argue that he has really 'made it'.

NETHERLANDS:
1 Boy Waterman
2 Gianni Zuiverloon
4 Arnold Kruiswijk
18 Ryan Donk
5 Erik Pieters
6 Hedwiges Maduro (c)
8 Royston Drenthe
11 Daniël de Ridder
10 Otman Bakkal
13 Maceo Rigters
9 Ryan Babel

[Hoop Blah]

RR, I think the factor that you're missing (at least I think it plays a big part but it might not) is that what makes an effective team better than the others within a tournament doesn't necessarily make the players within it good enough to contribute to the team the next level up (if that makes sense).

To try and put it another way, our boys did well as a team, relative to the other teams in the tournament. That doesn't mean those individuals involved are the right ones to step up and make the full team, partly because that full team may need different qualities.

That comes back to your good point that the Spanish and Germans seem to have found a system that works across the board. That's one way of looking at it, although it could just be that the generation have come through together at the right time to effectively step up together (I think Germany would've been a quite different team if Ballack hadn't got injured before the WC).

There are certainly things we need to improve over here but I don't think it's quite as bad as some would make out, and I don't think we now fit the big is best cliche that probably existed in the not too distant past.

[Royal Rother]

Hmm, interesting - maybe the Dutch have the same issues as us!

When my son's team played a tournament in Amsterdam a couple of years ago the lads (and parents) came back amazed at how big the Dutch youngsters were.

[TBM]

Thing is we really needed to win last night as Spain aren't even the favourites......we have them to play.

Czech Rep

[Seal]

Hmm, interesting - maybe the Dutch have the same issues as us!

When my son's team played a tournament in Amsterdam a couple of years ago the lads (and parents) came back amazed at how big the Dutch youngsters were.

Normally though people would associate the Dutch with having one of the best youth development systems in the world.

Maybe the answer is that you cannot perfect the system, there will always be a bit of luck and an inconsistency to when / how young players develop.

There are plenty of stories of players who dominated at youth level (all around the world I might add), but never fully make it. Sometimes development just stops, other lads catch up, and they get left behind. You should never underestimate the mental side of things too. Yes Messi and Ronaldo are blessed with amazing talent, but they also have an incredible work ethic. For all Ronaldo's flaws he is apparently a dream trainer - always first out, last in. Messi likewise. Some kids have all the talent but not the attitude, and they will always get left behind.

Yes we can put things in place to ensure better technical development, which is essential, but there will always be plenty of young players who don't fulfill their potential whatever structures are put in place.

[Royal Rother]

HB, all of what you say is perfectly fine, but the fact remains that we (at all levels) look outclassed technically by many (quite possibly MOST) football nations we come up against.

Mexico, France, Germany, Spain, Brazil have all run rings around us in the last year or so - even Japan, Switzerland and Algeria, have, off the top of my head, shown a better first touch than us.

I appreciate that football is about a lot more than the quality of the first touch (and we're damned good at many of the others) but it's pretty fundamental and, seeing as we are (comparitively) so poor at this facet of the game surely suggests that something is wrong with the coaching and ethos of football in this country.

[Royal Rother]

And Seal, all fair comments of course - I suggest (nothing stronger because I really can't know) that a part of the reason the good youngsters just don't train on (as it were) may in part be due to the fact that they were never as gifted as others who were not as big, strong and fast in their schoolboy days, but got selected because of the less important attributes. In time the advantage strength and early maturity provides are eroded so they end up not fulfilling what was perceived as great potential. Maybe...

Symptomatic of the problems are that, at my son's level, the big 11 year old who can hit the ball from 35 yards out into the top of the goal (where a 5 foot 'keeper hasn't a hope in hell of reaching) is seen as a more valuable member of a team than the little fella with the silky skills who can pick a pass but can't get up and down the pitch...