What's wrong with English football (Looooong post)

[LSUY]

I only scanned the post.

But there's a simple reason why England doesn't produce great footballers. We're the only country where the kids play 11-a-sides on full size pitches. Everywhere else they play on smaller pitches, or 5-a-side, so they learn how to move, how to use space, and close ball control. In England we don't.

Simple, but true.

That is so true. FourFourTwo had a brilliant piece about youth development in Holland, Portugal, France and England which pretty much showed that we are years behind them.

 

[MattyP]

I'd agree to a certain extent that Hiddinks achievements so far with Russia have not been as impressive as his previous achievements with Holland, South Korea and Australia.

But at the end of the day his team has qualified, and under McClaren we haven't. And I don't even think you need someone of Hiddinks stature to be able to work out that
1.Gerrard & Lumpard don't play well together,
2. That bringing in an inexperienced keeper on a terrible and wet pitch when your entire first choice defence is missing is foolish
3. When all you need to qualify is to draw changing the formation, isolating your striker is a risky situation
4. When you play five men in midfield and they are still getting overrun perhaps its time to bring on a defensive, discilpined midfielder like Hargreaves

And thats only last night's game.

 

[rez9000]

You say that you want us to have the potential to win trophies, but then also say on paper we can be a frightening proposition.

In my opinion we do have the potential to win trophies because we can be a frightening proposition. Surely one of the aims of the manager is to get the best out of the players, to get the tactics and team right in order to extract the maximum from this set of players.

With a better manager I firmly believe we would have qualified. With a world class manager we may even have gone further than a quarter final appearance.

I'm not saying I don't agree with what you have said, but at the end of the day if the FA had appointed Hiddink not McClaren I would not be struggling to think of somewhere to go on holiday next year.

It's a bit of both. As I said, foreign players are not the only problem, just one of our problems. Yes, England have the potential to be dangerous, but only if every one of our positions were filled with the best player.

We only have one Gerrard, one Rooney, one Owen. Once they're out of the picture, our management goes insane trying to find someone to cover those positions. Look at last night. Terry and Ferdinand out, and we get a CB pairing that was responsible for two of the three goals last night. We still havent' fixed our LB problem. Cole isn't a proper LB and Bridge isn't good enough. At RB we have Micah Richards or... Micah Richards. In goal we've got massive problems. Up front, we have Rooney, whose feet seem to be made of glass, Owen who gets injured if someone breathes on him too hard, Defoe whose club problems cause him form problems for both club and country. On the left we have Cole, who's consistent but only ocassionally a match-winner. In the middle, the two best English CMs in the country seem unable to play together.

Where do these weaknesses come from? Obviously the injury-prone players are not something that can be worked against, but what about the others? If you constructed a club team from Ferdinand, Terry, Lampard, Gerrard, Owen, Rooney etc, it woudl strike fear into the hearts of the opposition. But, instead of having three or four real potentials for each position, we have one or two. And the reason for this lack of depth is that English players are not getting the opportunities to develop into real world-beaters because we don't look after them when they start playing and refuse to put practises in place that can help them develop as they age.

And although foreign players are not directly responsible, their presence restricts access to the facilities that can turn young potential into world-class talent, along with the other problems I mentioned.

 

[Shanks]

Yeah I hear what your saying Joey.
Maybe the FA should scrap pointless friendlies and have long weekend get togethers with a large group of possible england players through the year before a major tournament.

I do agree on that side of things.

I also agree on the media thing as well, which is why Mourinho would be the perfect candidate as he can handle the british press probably better than most (Wenger/Fergie aside).

I think the players are good enough though.

 

[joey55]

That is so true. FourFourTwo had a brilliant piece about youth development in Holland, Portugal, France and England which pretty much showed that we are years behind them.

Also Christiano Ronaldo made a good point when he said he believes a key reason for his and other Portuguesse talent is street soccer as it is all about skill. And I believe that our coaching at a young age if far too concerned with coachng youngsters to be part of a team, rather than developing them as individuals. When I played for local sides as a kid, we never did individual ball skills and expressing ourselves on the pitch was always frowned upon. At pro level if a player like Taarabt takes on too many players etc, then it needs to be clamped down on, but at youth level the kids should be encouraged and not be affraid to show what they can do. Team ethic etc can be developed later when winning matches really matters. As kids learning to feel comfortable on the ball and really enjoying having the ball at their feet and doing tricks etc should be the most important thing. Ray is right about the 5 aside aspect. Those games are all about technique, skill and quick movement and interchanging. Whilst 11 aside, on bigger pitches, there is far more importance placed on the physical side of the game, therefore the phycial players flourish. That's what we do and hence there aren't many sides in the world that have as many athletic players as England. Yet we have very few quality technical players.

 

[MattyP]

If the FA pulled their fingers out of their arses and built this damned academy / centre of excellence it would also be a start, as not only would we have facilities for the youngsters, we'd also have somewhere for the next crop of coaches to be developed.

As for the media, well you only have to hear the comments from our opposition about being the media being disrespectful to understand why most teams raise their game against us.

 

[yanno]

If the FA pulled their fingers out of their arses and built this damned academy / centre of excellence it would also be a start, as not only would we have facilities for the youngsters, we'd also have somewhere for the next crop of coaches to be developed.

Perhaps, and Lilleshall must have had some part in developing the likes of Gary Neville and Judas. But if Judas' technique was improved @ Lilleshall, it must have been pretty shite to start with.

And at the bigger level, I fail to see in principle why a Centre of Excellence should be any more successful than a top EPL Academy. It could be argued that clubs have even more incentive to develop EPL players than a national CoE.

On the subject of academies, look at the English players who've made it through to first-team football at Spurs recently:

Ledley King - pure class
Luke Young - good EPL pro
Alton Thelwell - found his level in the lower leagues
Johnnie Jackson - found his level in the lower leagues
Rohan Ricketts - ditto
Steo Kelly - Birmingham probably his level
Steven Clemence - ditto
Dean Marney - found his level in the lower leagues
Etc

There are odd enigmas like Darren Caskey and Nicky Barmby who should have been top players, and weren't. But, fundamentally, I would argue that the success or failure of these players at Spurs had nothing to do with the presence of foreign players, and everything to do with their basic ability. Off the top of my head, the last top class British player who was in our Academy and became a top player elsewhere was Graeme Souness, and that's partly because he was a late developer...

 

[LSUY]

What's wrong with English football? How long have you got. I'm currently writing about it and comparing English football to other nations and other sports but I've already reached 6 pages. The amount of problems England have are stupid and show that the entire FA needs to be sacked and replaced with people who are more forward thinking. Everthing from the type of turf we have at the national stadium to player selection is wrong.

 

[ShadyRay]

Yeah, my earlier post was a bit brief. I was actually going to start a thread about this at some point, but hadn't got round to it.

As Teemu said, the other thing is using smaller balls. It improves technique and control, something most English players don't have. 10-15 year olds at the moment spend no time on ball skills, it's all about practice matches and fitness, and 11-a-side games. It teaches them nothing about movement (both on the ball and more importantly off the ball) or control. The best players and just the biggest and strongest.

This is why we don't produce any technically gifted players, and the rest of the world does.

 

[DC_Boy]

SGE is a great coach, Bobby Robson record in club manangement was top class. Yet once they become England coach they soon got absolutely hammered by the press and fans alike. We blame coaches when in reallity we simply aren't producing good enough players. quote]

Well said Joey (not for the first) - I've put a thread in general football about Sven and the 'golden generation'.

Before being sacked prior to the World Cup Sven had a tremendous record, but was vilified time and again by large sections of the media/fans.

I often challenged this vilification on forums like these (including here) and was often told but 'we've got such great players, we should be winning these trophies'.

I never accepted that argument then and don't now, and as far as I'm concerned I was nearer the truth than those who believed in the 'golden generation'.

Not one of the players under Sven were great international players (some may have been, like Seaman in Euro 96) - but there were some good ones, some very good ones, some indisciplined ones, and some less than than good ones. Golden generation - pleeze

give me Shearer and sheringham over Rooney and Owen - give me Adams over Terry - Seaman over James - and to be honest great club player that Gerrard is I think I'd take Gazza over him on the international stage

Of course that's just my opinion and may be wrong - but I'm absolutely convinced the whole 'golden generation' thing was ridiculous and those who used it as a stick to beat Sven were wrong.

 

[soup]

It's the pure arrogance that sits at the entire top table of English football. From the gutters of the press to the silver spoons at the F.A., it's one big fucking slaughterhouse where our game is being torn to shit.

We are always telling each other that we as fans, have no idea compared to the 'professionals' in the game but I'm starting to wonder if it's actually true?

Is there really a proper selection policy in the top tier of the game? On what advice do the F.A. make their decisions? And do they just know more people in football than they actually do about football? Because I'm starting to really worry it's turning from background politics to front-line embarrassment.

Going back some, look at Adam Crozier for a start, F.A. chief to Royal Mail success story(!), not exactly your average football genius. These days it's Brian Barwick, where when he can't get his first choice he ignores further public opinion and backs a manager whose career tactic is to play like shit for 70 minutes then play four strikers and hope for the best.

Sod getting someone like Shearer for manager, put him in charge of the F.A.! I don't care, put friggin' Ian Wright and Tim Sherwood in! At least there'd be a bit of fucking enthusiasm and passion beating at the heart of this current crock of shit.

It's why love him or hate him Allardyce never got the job and the same reason why even Clough never got it, the heads of the F.A. just haven't got the balls to let someone with a real personality get involved, they'd speak their mind and expose these mugs for the jokes they really are.

Look at this compensation lark for England managers, where you get rewarded more for failing and losing than you do for winning anything. I bet McClown will be one the best paid managers still out there this summer, even though he hasn't even got a team. I mean, they've only just finished paying Sven ffs! (Haven't they?!?!)

As for McClown it's a disgrace he even has the right to claim a pay-off, let alone want it. "One of the saddest days in my career", ever so slightly sweetened to the tune of 2.5 million pounds wasn't it Steve? How's about you lavish the Official England Supporters Club with a few rewards with that dirty cash constantly reminding you of your failures mate?

Mugs, mugs, mugs.

Saying that, I dunno, it's probably just fatboy Lampard's fault.

 

[yanno]

It's the pure arrogance that sits at the entire top table of English football. From the gutters of the press to the silver spoons at the F.A., it's one big fucking slaughterhouse where our game is being torn to shit.
...............
Sod getting someone like Shearer for manager, put him in charge of the F.A.! I don't care, put friggin' Ian Wright and Tim Sherwood in! At least there'd be a bit of fucking enthusiasm and passion beating at the heart of this current crock of shit.

I agree about the FA being a bunch of self-serving, arrogant, *****s.

But surely Kevin Keegan proved that the England national team need more than a Mr Motivator figure. Keegan got them so fired up that Paul Scholes was a great bet for a Red card every time England took to the field, but it was abundantly clear that Keegan's lack of tactical nous was crippling England.

Imo senior players can do a lot of the dressing room motivation. England need a coach who understands international football.

 

[sloth]

To: Rez & Yanno (because i think this primarily addresses your posts)

I disagree Rez, that the quantity of foreigners has an adverse effect on the game. Players will find their level.

I agree that they don't always achieve their potential however, but I think this is indicative of a problem much further up-stream and this is where i touch on one of Yanno's earlier posts.

I agree with you Yanno that it's a problem with the academies, but I think you've missed a simple point. before the age of 15 boys are only allowed to play for clubs within a time-fixed radius of their homes. This means the talent from Kettering or Maidstone or Newcastle-Under-Lyme has from the age of five to train with the local clod-hoppers.

This is a good thing because it preserves the strength, depth and grass-root flavour of football in this country, however it's no surprise that in countries with few professional clubs, where this rule doesn't apply, the big clubs have huge academies and skim the best the entire land has to offer.

Because of this players learn in top environments with the best coaches and facilities concentrating on key skills amongst peers of comparable ability.

The clubs invest multi-millions on academies because the raw material they have to work with has so much potential.

Players in their age group grow up playing with each other from a young age, they learn the same techniques, systems and each others game. They move through the international youth system and when/if they become full-internationals the they already know each other so there is a Club style understanding between them.

We cannot mimic this without damaging the game at grass-roots.

 

[yanno]

I agree with you Yanno that it's a problem with the academies, but I think you've missed a simple point. before the age of 15 boys are only allowed to play for clubs within a time-fixed radius of their homes. This means the talent from Kettering or Maidstone or Newcastle-Under-Lyme has from the age of five to train with the local clod-hoppers.

This is a good thing because it preserves the strength, depth and grass-root flavour of football in this country, however it's no surprise that in countries with few professional clubs, where this rule doesn't apply, the big clubs have huge academies and skim the best the entire land has to offer.

Because of this players learn in top environments with the best coaches and facilities concentrating on key skills amongst peers of comparable ability.

The clubs invest multi-millions on academies because the raw material they have to work with has so much potential.

Players in their age group grow up playing with each other from a young age, they learn the same techniques, systems and each others game. They move through the international youth system and when/if they become full-internationals the they already know each other so there is a Club style understanding between them.

We cannot mimic this without damaging the game at grass-roots.

Sloth - good argument, well expressed.

My friend is keeping his 10-year-old out of EPL academies because, firstly, he wants him to still be able to play football for his school, with his mates - for social, emotional growth, reasons. Secondly, because the family are quite academic, and he wants him to carry on doing his homework. And thirdly, because he knows only a tiny fraction of talented 10-year-olds end up as top class professional footballers.

So, your point about damaging the game at grass roots level is very important, as is the fact that uprooting kids to centres of excellence is effectively putting all their eggs into one basket. If the talented 10-year-old doesn't make it, he probably won't have many educational skills to fall back on. Indeed, some Dutch/Belgian clubs have been investigated for child exploitation for their treatment of young African kids, brought to Europe and then abandoned in their teens.

The Spurs Academy is now stuffed full of England age-group internationals, with a couple of highly regarded youth team coaches in Inglethorpe and McDermott. But if one or two of our current U18 team make it as EPL players, that will be a very high level of achievement. Quite why this is the case - ie why a player like Leigh Mills can be England captain at 15, and quite possibly a lower league player by 20 - is a mystery, but the academies have to share the blame.

 

[DC_Boy]

Oh and by the way of course it was England not France that formalised the rules of football - as far back as 1863 from memory - way before the French were playing organised football - also we had the first proper Cup Final - the first international with Scotland and the first professional league - it took France a long long time to catch up - but it's true in the 20th Century through pioneering the World Cup and European Cup they took the international game far wider.

 

[SpurSince57]

I can't help but think that the mentality of the blazers at the FA hasn't really changed that much since we fell foul of them in the 'Payne's Boots' affair 114 years ago. We still seem to have the old school tie Corinthian ethos hanging over the game. Cricket and Rugby Union have moved on, football hasn't.

I'm not quite old enough to remember Hungary mullering us in 1953, but Arthur Rowe's Spurs side, based on the ideas he'd picked up in Hungary before WWII, gave a taste of the future which wasn't taken on board. As a nation, we remained resolutely long-ball. Sir Stanley Rous and Walter Winterbottom. We're better than those foreign Johnnies.

 

[N10toN17]

I get so frustrated just thinking about the F.A. Why are we so slow to take on new ideas and thinkng? As SS57 has said our suits in charge have left us playing a brand of football which will never deliver at the top level.

If everyone of us can clearly see that our players are technically poor in comparison and always have been, why haven't they addressed this glaringly obvious problem.

It seems that England are going to have to become really poor before anything gets done. Our youngsters need to be playing on small 5 a side pitches, where physical strength is not an issue, where they can learn close control and movement, ie learn the basics.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Also Christiano Ronaldo made a good point when he said he believes a key reason for his and other Portuguesse talent is street soccer as it is all about skill. And I believe that our coaching at a young age if far too concerned with coachng youngsters to be part of a team, rather than developing them as individuals. When I played for local sides as a kid, we never did individual ball skills and expressing ourselves on the pitch was always frowned upon. At pro level if a player like Taarabt takes on too many players etc, then it needs to be clamped down on, but at youth level the kids should be encouraged and not be affraid to show what they can do. Team ethic etc can be developed later when winning matches really matters. As kids learning to feel comfortable on the ball and really enjoying having the ball at their feet and doing tricks etc should be the most important thing. Ray is right about the 5 aside aspect. Those games are all about technique, skill and quick movement and interchanging. Whilst 11 aside, on bigger pitches, there is far more importance placed on the physical side of the game, therefore the phycial players flourish. That's what we do and hence there aren't many sides in the world that have as many athletic players as England. Yet we have very few quality technical players.

This is exactly at the heart of the problem. When I wrote my post in the England Croatia thread I touched on the lack of technique/technical ability in English players. I actually wrote that the problem starts with coaching at junior level and went on a bit so deleted that part of the post.

It has got slightly better than my day when kids with skill were almost frowned upon as "showboaters" and rejected often in favour of more "athletic" kids, but it is still pretty much as you say.

Part of the problem is defeinately as you say, a real lack of street football where anything goes and you have no "dad manager" pretending he's Brian Clough bellowing at you to "get rid" before you heaven forbid loose the ball.

I don't mean to knock all the amateur "dad managers" out there who give up there time but so many times I've watched junior games and been pissed off by the way that at 11 and 12 etc so much emphisis is put on winning and graft as apposed to skills, technique and expression.

Junior football is so structured and pressure is put on results and winning so early that it stifles sometimes.



Rez

I disagree with just about everything you wrote and your solutions.

 

[MattyP]

BC, agree with what you say.

I'm no expert (I would say neither are the FA), but from what I understand youngsters can be affiliated to a club from the age of 9.

If this is indeed the case, then why not concentrate on coaching the skill aspect of the game from the ages of 4 to 9 years old. I'm sure this goes on to a certain extent already, but no doubt it is polluted by the team ethic thing, rather than making it fun for kids at a real early age, teaching them how to dribble, how to shoot, pass with both feet, how to hit a square foot target nine times out of ten.

In my opinion, you can drill youngsters how to learn the right time to pass, team play etc at a later stage. I'm not a coach admittedly, but surely you can focus skills once they develop a lot more easily that teaching skills to an already focused youth.

If we can have fat camps for youngsters, can we not have football skills camps, get kids interested and enjoying the art of football, before being taught how to run eight miles a game.

Maybe its being done, but if I was the FA I'd get the likes of Ginola, Gazza, Waddle involved in the under 9's to teach the things that they found natural.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Don't get me wrong, I don't think the dad managers are all bad, alot of the problem is this "structuring" that they are forced to work in which is handed down by the FA at various levels.

Let me give you a great example of an English footballer. Sol Campbell. He came through Lilleshall, England's school of excellence, played at all levels and regarded as £20+ mil player in his heyday. Why ? Because he is a big, strong athletic boy. Yet his skill and technique are appauling compared his opposite numbers on Wednesday. He has always been terrible on the ball, uncomfortable like it's a hot potato.

In terms of getting Gazza etc involved I don't think it's a bad idea, just because football needs to be fun. But it wouldn't necessarily be a case of teaching kids skills. I don't think you can teach kids how to be a Gazza, it is just a natural thing but what we do need to do is start concentrating on finding a way to encourage naturaly gifted kids instead of structuring the hell out of them. We need to start changing our criteria of what is a "useful" skillset. Putting more value on technique and vision/reading/aptitude than athletic endeavour.

One thing you can coach though is things like first touch, two footedness, control of the ball. These are basic things that I see English premiership players being embarrisingly shit at.

As a kid, if my mates weren't around to kick about with I would spend hours just kicking a ball around. Keepy uppies, wall ball just kicking with my left foot until it was as good as my right. Nowadays a lad whose mates aren't around is far more likely to pick up his gameboy than his football - that's even if he would be allowed out in the street to play on his jack jones.