- Oct 3, 2011
- 14,149
- 38,348
dinzeyi's out of england's u18 squad.
tbh he shouldn't be there anyway.
tbh he shouldn't be there anyway.
dinzeyi's out of england's u18 squad.
tbh he shouldn't be there anyway.
Why? Is he not good enough?
Binks has been called up to England u15s. No doubt after impressing for Scotland
I suspect this has been done to death over the years, but after seeing the phrase “men against boys” a few times when reading about the u18´s anhiliation at the hands of Chelsea, I thought I´d check the birth dates of the respective squads.
The well known theory is that, the world over, elite level youth teams are packed with boys born in the first few months of the eligible year; those who at the young ages that they are first spotted and recruited have a significant physical advantage. Once “in the system” they receive the best coaching and development opportunities, so their comparative advantage persists even as the initial physical edge becomes less significant over time.
So in most countries, with a cut off date of 1st January, youth teams tend to be biased towards boys born January to April; in England, with a cut off date of 1st September, birth dates from September to December are favoured.
Here is a summary of the results for Chelsea and Spurs U18 squads. Source was soccerway.com squad listings. A few lads did not have a birth date listed so the figures are not 100% complete – but close. It´s a small sample, but the results were interesting.
Chelsea: of 36 players listed, 20 were born in the first 3 months (sept to nov); 30 were born in the first 6 months (sept to feb)
Spurs: of 33 players, 12 were born in sept to nov; 22 in sept to feb.
Also note: the vast majority of players are English. Of the few European players, there was a bias towards the early months of the calender year – i.e. January to april - the favoured months for boys from those countries to hop aboard the fast-track train.
So both squads show the expected bias, but Chelsea´s much more markedly – possibly indicating that Spurs selection is more skewed to technical characteristics than physical attributes. And yes, I suspect it is possible to come back and note that Chelsea´s crop also seem to display more technical skill – no doubt down to a mixture of prime-cut selection and excellent training - but to me the fascinating and unavoidable conclusion has to be that if the FA had a qualification date of 1st jan, Chelsea would probably still be sweeping the board – but with a different set of players!
I must admit I was rather surprised at the results – small sample notwithstanding. This is such a well known phenomenem that I would have thought academies would be taking it into account. So another conclusion is that the various aims of various acadamies do not necessitate a change to current practice. If it ain´t broke don´t fix it.
Thanks for doing this, I was planning on doing similar myself.I suspect this has been done to death over the years, but after seeing the phrase “men against boys” a few times when reading about the u18´s anhiliation at the hands of Chelsea, I thought I´d check the birth dates of the respective squads.
The well known theory is that, the world over, elite level youth teams are packed with boys born in the first few months of the eligible year; those who at the young ages that they are first spotted and recruited have a significant physical advantage. Once “in the system” they receive the best coaching and development opportunities, so their comparative advantage persists even as the initial physical edge becomes less significant over time.
So in most countries, with a cut off date of 1st January, youth teams tend to be biased towards boys born January to April; in England, with a cut off date of 1st September, birth dates from September to December are favoured.
Here is a summary of the results for Chelsea and Spurs U18 squads. Source was soccerway.com squad listings. A few lads did not have a birth date listed so the figures are not 100% complete – but close. It´s a small sample, but the results were interesting.
Chelsea: of 36 players listed, 20 were born in the first 3 months (sept to nov); 30 were born in the first 6 months (sept to feb)
Spurs: of 33 players, 12 were born in sept to nov; 22 in sept to feb.
Also note: the vast majority of players are English. Of the few European players, there was a bias towards the early months of the calender year – i.e. January to april - the favoured months for boys from those countries to hop aboard the fast-track train.
So both squads show the expected bias, but Chelsea´s much more markedly – possibly indicating that Spurs selection is more skewed to technical characteristics than physical attributes. And yes, I suspect it is possible to come back and note that Chelsea´s crop also seem to display more technical skill – no doubt down to a mixture of prime-cut selection and excellent training - but to me the fascinating and unavoidable conclusion has to be that if the FA had a qualification date of 1st jan, Chelsea would probably still be sweeping the board – but with a different set of players!
I must admit I was rather surprised at the results – small sample notwithstanding. This is such a well known phenomenem that I would have thought academies would be taking it into account. So another conclusion is that the various aims of various acadamies do not necessitate a change to current practice. If it ain´t broke don´t fix it.
I suspect this has been done to death over the years, but after seeing the phrase “men against boys” a few times when reading about the u18´s anhiliation at the hands of Chelsea, I thought I´d check the birth dates of the respective squads.
The well known theory is that, the world over, elite level youth teams are packed with boys born in the first few months of the eligible year; those who at the young ages that they are first spotted and recruited have a significant physical advantage. Once “in the system” they receive the best coaching and development opportunities, so their comparative advantage persists even as the initial physical edge becomes less significant over time.
So in most countries, with a cut off date of 1st January, youth teams tend to be biased towards boys born January to April; in England, with a cut off date of 1st September, birth dates from September to December are favoured.
Here is a summary of the results for Chelsea and Spurs U18 squads. Source was soccerway.com squad listings. A few lads did not have a birth date listed so the figures are not 100% complete – but close. It´s a small sample, but the results were interesting.
Chelsea: of 36 players listed, 20 were born in the first 3 months (sept to nov); 30 were born in the first 6 months (sept to feb)
Spurs: of 33 players, 12 were born in sept to nov; 22 in sept to feb.
Also note: the vast majority of players are English. Of the few European players, there was a bias towards the early months of the calender year – i.e. January to april - the favoured months for boys from those countries to hop aboard the fast-track train.
So both squads show the expected bias, but Chelsea´s much more markedly – possibly indicating that Spurs selection is more skewed to technical characteristics than physical attributes. And yes, I suspect it is possible to come back and note that Chelsea´s crop also seem to display more technical skill – no doubt down to a mixture of prime-cut selection and excellent training - but to me the fascinating and unavoidable conclusion has to be that if the FA had a qualification date of 1st jan, Chelsea would probably still be sweeping the board – but with a different set of players!
I must admit I was rather surprised at the results – small sample notwithstanding. This is such a well known phenomenon that I would have thought academies would be taking it into account. So another conclusion is that the various aims of various acadamies do not necessitate a change to current practice. If it ain´t broke don´t fix it.
Thanks for doing this, I was planning on doing similar myself.
How did the ages in general compare?
Thanks for digging those out. Interesting - and encouraging - that we take the relative age effect into account at Spurs - certainly as far as our u18 squad is concerned the squad is relatively evenly distributed. And moving away from facts and figures into the murky world of my own perceptions, it seems to tally with our long-standing habit of turning out good littl'uns. Arguably too little of course, with Tom Carroll being the latest in a line of examples stretching way back. Phil Holder anyone...?I know I've read articles where we have acknowledged that this is the case and so we purposely have measures to counter it.........
Former LB Yuri Berchiche is wanted by Real Madrid
Thanks for digging those out. Interesting - and encouraging - that we take the relative age effect into account at Spurs - certainly as far as our u18 squad is concerned the squad is relatively evenly distributed. And moving away from facts and figures into the murky world of my own perceptions, it seems to tally with our long-standing habit of turning out good littl'uns. Arguably too little of course, with Tom Carroll being the latest in a line of examples stretching way back. Phil Holder anyone...?
Binks has been called up to England u15s. No doubt after impressing for Scotland
Yea, er we let him go a free to Real Union(a third division side in Spain) where he stayed at that level for two season before joining Real Sociedad for freeHope we had a sell on clause then! (Sociedad wasn't it?)