Football (Soccer) Thread

[The Larch]

The real problem is the FA and the English coaching infrastructure, which has an institutional and cultural bias towards a very physical brand of football. Basic technique is not valued in the English game, especially at the lower levels; youth here tend to play on larger pitches where first touch and ball control is not as important as GET RID!! and KNOCK IT FORWARD SON!!.

IIRC, there's a statistic that is often quoted to explain this, and it's the number of coaches with top UEFA qualifications, or something like that, with Spain and Germany each having more than 10 times the number of top coaches than England.

I have also read some pet theory touted around by a pundit regarding the detrimental effect of the traditional loaning out of young prospects by Premiership clubs to other clubs at much lower divisions (ie, lower than Championship) during their prime developmental years between the end of their stay in the academies but before joining the first team, when instead of learning with top coaches and mingling with the first team they're sent to some backwater where they're taught the "proper" way of playing, booting the ball up in muddy fields. IIRC he argued that the Reserve teams should be scrapped and continental style B teams more or less restricted for young players should take their place. There might be a pinch of truth in that.

[Warspite]

The real problem is the FA and the English coaching infrastructure, which has an institutional and cultural bias towards a very physical brand of football. Basic technique is not valued in the English game, especially at the lower levels; youth here tend to play on larger pitches where first touch and ball control is not as important as GET RID!! and KNOCK IT FORWARD SON!!.

IIRC, there's a statistic that is often quoted to explain this, and it's the number of coaches with top UEFA qualifications, or something like that, with Spain and Germany each having more than 10 times the number of top coaches than England.

I have also read some pet theory touted around by a pundit regarding the detrimental effect of the traditional loaning out of young prospects by Premiership clubs to other clubs at much lower divisions (ie, lower than Championship) during their prime developmental years between the end of their stay in the academies but before joining the first team, when instead of learning with top coaches and mingling with the first team they're sent to some backwater where they're taught the "proper" way of playing, booting the ball up in muddy fields. IIRC he argued that the Reserve teams should be scrapped and continental style B teams more or less restricted for young players should take their place. There might be a pinch of truth in that.

I think good clubs only loan out players in the 19/20 age range; I think by then one's style of play is pretty settled. Certainly, one is not going to develop natural technique by then. The problem is that apart from Arsenal, there aren't many clubs at all that have a specific focus on a technical and possession game. I've heard people saying that the rot in the English game sets it at the ages of 8 to 15 - which is why the top academies in the UK have to un-teach much of what their new entrants have learnt at the very junior level.

[The Larch]

The real problem is the FA and the English coaching infrastructure, which has an institutional and cultural bias towards a very physical brand of football. Basic technique is not valued in the English game, especially at the lower levels; youth here tend to play on larger pitches where first touch and ball control is not as important as GET RID!! and KNOCK IT FORWARD SON!!.

IIRC, there's a statistic that is often quoted to explain this, and it's the number of coaches with top UEFA qualifications, or something like that, with Spain and Germany each having more than 10 times the number of top coaches than England.

I have also read some pet theory touted around by a pundit regarding the detrimental effect of the traditional loaning out of young prospects by Premiership clubs to other clubs at much lower divisions (ie, lower than Championship) during their prime developmental years between the end of their stay in the academies but before joining the first team, when instead of learning with top coaches and mingling with the first team they're sent to some backwater where they're taught the "proper" way of playing, booting the ball up in muddy fields. IIRC he argued that the Reserve teams should be scrapped and continental style B teams more or less restricted for young players should take their place. There might be a pinch of truth in that.

I think good clubs only loan out players in the 19/20 age range; I think by then one's style of play is pretty settled. Certainly, one is not going to develop natural technique by then. The problem is that apart from Arsenal, there aren't many clubs at all that have a specific focus on a technical and possession game. I've heard people saying that the rot in the English game sets it at the ages of 8 to 15 - which is why the top academies in the UK have to un-teach much of what their new entrants have learnt at the very junior level.

8 to 15? Then you have a lot of work to do...  That's basically revamping the whole youth training scheme of the English system.

[Warspite]

The real problem is the FA and the English coaching infrastructure, which has an institutional and cultural bias towards a very physical brand of football. Basic technique is not valued in the English game, especially at the lower levels; youth here tend to play on larger pitches where first touch and ball control is not as important as GET RID!! and KNOCK IT FORWARD SON!!.

IIRC, there's a statistic that is often quoted to explain this, and it's the number of coaches with top UEFA qualifications, or something like that, with Spain and Germany each having more than 10 times the number of top coaches than England.

I have also read some pet theory touted around by a pundit regarding the detrimental effect of the traditional loaning out of young prospects by Premiership clubs to other clubs at much lower divisions (ie, lower than Championship) during their prime developmental years between the end of their stay in the academies but before joining the first team, when instead of learning with top coaches and mingling with the first team they're sent to some backwater where they're taught the "proper" way of playing, booting the ball up in muddy fields. IIRC he argued that the Reserve teams should be scrapped and continental style B teams more or less restricted for young players should take their place. There might be a pinch of truth in that.

That's what the critics say is necessary. 

The only great English technical players I can remember produced by the English system over the last fifteen years are Joe Cole, Wayne Rooney and Jack Wilshere.
I think good clubs only loan out players in the 19/20 age range; I think by then one's style of play is pretty settled. Certainly, one is not going to develop natural technique by then. The problem is that apart from Arsenal, there aren't many clubs at all that have a specific focus on a technical and possession game. I've heard people saying that the rot in the English game sets it at the ages of 8 to 15 - which is why the top academies in the UK have to un-teach much of what their new entrants have learnt at the very junior level.

8 to 15? Then you have a lot of work to do...  That's basically revamping the whole youth training scheme of the English system.

[Richard Hakluyt]

On the rare occasions that I watch a game, perhaps six times in ten years, this lack of craftmanship in England's play is obvious even to me. It is baffling that, decade after decade, this situation is allowed to continue 

Is there, perhaps, a conflict between teaching an ordinary boy how to play the game in a way that promotes character and the teaching required for success in international football? Perhaps your typical PE teacher is worried that too much focus on craftmanship will encourage effeminate continental ways 

But that sounds ridiculously old-fashioned

[The Larch]

The real problem is the FA and the English coaching infrastructure, which has an institutional and cultural bias towards a very physical brand of football. Basic technique is not valued in the English game, especially at the lower levels; youth here tend to play on larger pitches where first touch and ball control is not as important as GET RID!! and KNOCK IT FORWARD SON!!.

IIRC, there's a statistic that is often quoted to explain this, and it's the number of coaches with top UEFA qualifications, or something like that, with Spain and Germany each having more than 10 times the number of top coaches than England.

I have also read some pet theory touted around by a pundit regarding the detrimental effect of the traditional loaning out of young prospects by Premiership clubs to other clubs at much lower divisions (ie, lower than Championship) during their prime developmental years between the end of their stay in the academies but before joining the first team, when instead of learning with top coaches and mingling with the first team they're sent to some backwater where they're taught the "proper" way of playing, booting the ball up in muddy fields. IIRC he argued that the Reserve teams should be scrapped and continental style B teams more or less restricted for young players should take their place. There might be a pinch of truth in that.

I think good clubs only loan out players in the 19/20 age range; I think by then one's style of play is pretty settled. Certainly, one is not going to develop natural technique by then. The problem is that apart from Arsenal, there aren't many clubs at all that have a specific focus on a technical and possession game. I've heard people saying that the rot in the English game sets it at the ages of 8 to 15 - which is why the top academies in the UK have to un-teach much of what their new entrants have learnt at the very junior level.

8 to 15? Then you have a lot of work to do...  That's basically revamping the whole youth training scheme of the English system.

That's what the critics say is necessary. 

The only great English technical players I can remember produced by the English system over the last fifteen years are Joe Cole, Wayne Rooney and Jack Wilshere.

Only those three? I guess you consider Lampard and Gerrard, for instance, more of the gritty kind of player.

[Warspite]

Lamps and Gerrard are your classic English hardworking midfielder. Fat Frank also has the advantage that he's really good at scoring deflected goals.

The thing is, there's a place in a well-rounded team for them; Barca have Dani Alves, for example, whose main quality is that he can sprint non-stop for 90 minutes. But when your entire team is made of less skilful, hard working types, you end up with England's style of choking midfield play.

[The Larch]

Lamps and Gerrard are your classic English hardworking midfielder. Fat Frank also has the advantage that he's really good at scoring deflected goals.

The thing is, there's a place in a well-rounded team for them; Barca have Dani Alves, for example, whose main quality is that he can sprint non-stop for 90 minutes. But when your entire team is made of less skilful, hard working types, you end up with England's style of choking midfield play.

What about Beckham? Or do you consider him part of a previous generation already?

[Warspite]

Lamps and Gerrard are your classic English hardworking midfielder. Fat Frank also has the advantage that he's really good at scoring deflected goals.

The thing is, there's a place in a well-rounded team for them; Barca have Dani Alves, for example, whose main quality is that he can sprint non-stop for 90 minutes. But when your entire team is made of less skilful, hard working types, you end up with England's style of choking midfield play.

What about Beckham? Or do you consider him part of a previous generation already?

He was produced more than fifteen years ago. I would lump him in with Giggs, who is an excellent all-round player. No surprise he's still at the top level after 20 years of consisten performance.

[The Larch]

This discussion made me remember this:

Matt Le Tissier's top 10 goals: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSsdfe4Z69g

The 2nd one is unbelievable.

[Warspite]

Le Tissier was ridiculously good - which is why he had a non-existent England career. 

[Sheilbh]

Le Tissier was ridiculously good - which is why he had a non-existent England career. 

He should have set up a Channel Islands team.

[Valmy]

He should have set up a Channel Islands team.

Wouldn't that be the Duchy of Normandy team?  I mean every other part of the UK has their own team.

[Josquius]

Le Tissier was ridiculously good - which is why he had a non-existent England career. 

I wouldnt say that great but yeah, he was good. bizzare he never got into the england Ｔｅａｍ

[The Larch]

Damn, City has just humilliated United at Old Trafford. 1-6, that must hurt!