The lacklustre showing from the England U-21s has prompted Graham Taylor to criticise the Premier league for playing foreign players at the expense of the development of young English players. Whilst he has a point, I don't think you can engineer an 'English only' environment and it would simply just water down the standard of the league. Far better to put more money and resources into the academies. We already have some great examples, like the one at Southampton, where players like Walcott and Ox are now playing at the highest level for club and country. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22831838
The media always come out with the same excuses when England are knocked out of a tournament.The reason the U21's were rubbish may have something to do with the coach.Pearce failed as a club manager and never forget that this is the same bloke who said Bergkamp was a waste of money and that he would never make it in the Premier League http://gossip.ladyarse.com/arsenal/2012/10/24/archive-stuart-peace-bergkamp-is-a-waste-of-money/
I don't think it was a much different situation in Bundesliga, but the German national team seem to be doing fine in recent years. Plus they have more recently naturalized citizens in their team than most teams AFAIK, nevertheless the talent pool is still there despite a high number of foreign players in the top leagues. Add to that even the second ranking league of Germany is filled with players from central and south-eastern Europe, with a higher percentage of foreign players than most leagues on the same level.
That sums up where the problem lies then, not with foreign nationals, but with a combination of players that aren't good enough and coaching that doesn't bring out the best in them.
The problem with most British coaches is they want to play football from the dark ages e.g.Fat Sam,Pulis,Mark Hughes
Well it could be a problem if the 'local' players aren't willing to be competitive enough, both on the field/training ground as well as on wages etc. Fact of the matter is for a club it's much cheaper to 'poach' from the top 0.01% talent from say 50 countries, than invest (time, coaching, academies,...) in getting comparable quality from the top 1% of the players of a single country (who might be needier financially).
I think part of the problem is the 'instant gratification' culture that clubs like Chelsea and City have pursued too. Whereas Wenger said 10 years ago that it would take 10 years for the next crop of English youngsters to come through (Gibbs, Walcott, Ox, Wilshere) most of the big clubs simply spent their way to success and that meant plundering the leagues around the world to get the best young players available.
Martin Samuel wrote in the DM comparing the approaches of Germany an England after Euro 2000 disasters. We spent £750m on the most expensive lokks-like-any-other-modern-stadium ever built, and the Germans invested in coaches and academies. Trouble is, we've had an elite academy before, the one at Lilleshall, which I think go closed down. Germany has over 20,000 UEFA qualified caochaes but we only have around 3,000. Our culture is too weak. By that I mean we are raising children who are on the whole less disciplined and respectful of key aspects of life that are vital to personal development. Also, football being largely the preserve of the masses whilst the elite schools play Rugby, I have haerd the view expressed that what we essentially get in football are the foot soldiers and Rugby gets the officer corp. THis I think robs our football and national team of the players of finesse, guile, intelligence who are difference in top teams. Look in the directors/dignatories boxes in continental grounds and you will see ex-players mingling with politicians and business men. It is I feel this greater balance in cultural make up of the sport that makes it maore likely for people who the essential qualityies of a modern coach to prosper. Our lot don't have these qualities. These academies need to be more about more than football. They need to be about producing balance, well-rounded, inqusitive, intelligent human beings, who can longer term become innovative coaches.
Hmm . . I think you're making moral and social assumptions where there are none to be honest. Rugby was always considered to be the 'posh boys' sport when I was at school, but that was simply down to the fact that the kids who went to private school had rich parents, they had more money, not more guile, finesse or intelligence. In fact it was often only because of the money and connections that these kids ended up with well paid jobs - social engineering, rather than achievement by merit. I'm not sure that seeing ex players mingling with politicians and businessmen in continental grounds is a mark of esteemed achievement or more culturally rounded experience either. In Italy or Russia, it would be more likely that you have connections with the criminal underground than any marker of good social and moral upbringing. So I have to question your rationale for evidence of this being an aspiration for our young British players. It's less about class and social standing, and more about providing good academies, strong leadership and a sound work ethic. If anything, the lure of money and rubbing shoulders with celebrities/politicians has done more damage to the game than good. Our young players need to get their heads down and work hard on their game. If they do well, then they deserves their rewards, but there are too many players chasing the dream of instant success, without wanting to put in the shift.
I remember when Hughes was Wales manager and we played Russia in a play-off for the 2004 Euros.We played the first leg away so Hughes put 11 men behind the ball and luckily we came away with a 0-0 draw.The tactic for the second leg was hoof the ball long and try and get it onto John Hartson's head.We went 1-0 down and Hughes still didn't have the intelligence to change the game plan.1-0 was all the Russians needed and it was another heroic failure
Foreign coaches are way ahead of their time. Brings me back to the days when Vialli got slated for being the first to play an all foriegn XI and Wenger called anti-English for being the first to field a squad with no English players. Wenger had always said there was no value in the market for English players as they were overpriced and overvalued. Thierry Henry, Vieira, Petit et al were picked up for paltry sums and better than any English player. Zaha and Henderson worth a combined £35m. That would have bought the entire Norway U-21 squad that picked them apart with ease. For me, that represents everything that's wrong with the English game/culture (something that TenG eluded to), players that have proved nothing are apparently worth everything.
When we beat Real Madrid in the CL in 2006 a certain Alan Pardew said that Arsenal couldn't really call themselves an English team because of all the foreign players.Yes i am talking about the current Newcastle manager
I think hes wrong to blame the Premier League. They have to compete with the rest of Europe and the youngsters have not shown enough to warrant playing for the top clubs. The problem starts from the very very bottom. Primary school PE. I played a different position every year at Primary school because the teacher felt it best to give everyone a chance. So the talented players rarely got to express their talent ( I was ok but not a special talent before anyone suggests its about me ). I do remember playing at an indoor tournament aged 10 or 11 though where the focus was on quick passing and technique but this was a one off. I believe the year below me never played in such a tournament nor any other year 6 classes. Seems it was cancelled. I got to high school and it was much the same. I had decided I was a right winger by then and modelled myself on a mix of Giggs and Beckham. During matches with other schools it tended to b a case of get the ball out wide to me or hoof it over the top. that was it. Scouts from Burnley, Blackburn and United came to watch us train and play a game one day ( our PE teacher was a former Pro of some kind, cant think of his name ) and not one person even got a sniff. So before we all blame the clubs and their spending lets look at the whole picture. The same rubbish and negative tactics have been drilled into generation after generation of english kids. from their first day at primary school to the day the lucky ones make their club debuts. In order for this to change and to change permanently we need to start right from primary school.
Not enough coaches, not enough respect given to competitions like the U21 Euros by clubs, players and the media and no cohesive plan for the future. Having a team of players go through a tournament like this and then move up into the senior squad would be far more valuable than playing a couple of friendlies or lying on a beach.
I agree with this. There is the story about David Beckham being dropped in High School. Boy's football is very difficult to coach. You need to have competition, because competitive games create the situations you need to practice, but the players that win competitive games at young ages are the ones that are bigger and stronger than the others. Unfortunately, the referees at the youth level think they are refereeing in the PL and try to let the game flow and allow the larger kids to dominate the game physically. Messi simply would not have been a football player if he had played in England. He would have been crushed by some thug aged 7. We need to play competitive football. We need to play large sided games, as well as small-sided games, because 11-a-side football creates completely different situations and opportunities to 5-a-side football. And we need referees and coaches to get rid of the physical aspect of football at the younger ages. It needs to be a totally non-contact sport. We are lagging behind, because we invest our training and effort into unskillful, unintelligent players that have hit puberty before their classmates and therefore can win games and star in the loosely-refereed hurly-burly brawl of youth football.
