Was that not in the news this week, the amount of our Olympic athletes, top sports people that went to state schools is virtually null. (I assume football is an exception) most went private, grammer, outside tuition and then through university clubs etc...(how many universities have football teams....I honestly dont remember Queens having one...I knew about their rugby GA, athletics , hockey, rowing etc etc but not football...) I suppose to get a kid at all ages across the country to the best trainers & complexes as well competitions, especially international needs wealthy parents as Funding is so sporadic.
It's nearly 50 years of nothing. It is disgraceful to go 10 years without getting better but 50 years tells us we have got things all wrong and the sad thing is there is no light at the end of the tunnel as the premiership comes before national pride and it's ironic that we watch and cheer foreign players at our teams.....our system needs a big shake up or we will not come close to winning anything. Even the lower leagues are starting this trend of using foreign exports before our own players......that's bad and don't look good for the future...
If all you ****s would stop buying our players, we could produce a whole ****ing England team for you.
I haven't seen any news items on it, it was Livtor's comment about scholarship got me thinking. Football belongs to the working class and that's how we like it. There are elite sports like rowing which you only get involved in at uni. Don't want football to be an elite sport but the best schools do tend to produce best sportsmen [obviously there's loads of exceptions] and I wondered if it was the winning ethos/mentality. Ordinary kids go to good schools and get great exam results because they are driven to do so by the school ethos of being the best. How do you translate that ethos and desire into football prowess? I don't know.
yeah scholarships and such but equally the state of american collegiate athletics is sad. when i was over there i heard cnn on about guys getting degrees in basically nothing and then being unemployable when their college careers were over. in short then school fails kids, clubs fail kids and sunday league obviously fails kids. I cannot see a pirlo, xavi or oh i dunno bergkamp, zola or even mata/silva coming through the english ranks... just can't i see 20 henry wannabee clones who can bascially run and not much else.
It's an escape route for lots of them. Not much going for them but good at sport so get a scholarship, have someone complete their assignments for them, fail to make the team, then what? Not the same here, used to be an escape route and sports like boxing prove that but football these days is celebrity status, where's the hunger coming from?
There's 2 distinctly different issues here 1. Football club academies 2. How the game is 'taught' (lol) in our school system The former is now massively resourced, but is about producing players for the club who owns it and has nothing to do with English talent, as a large proportion of the lads coming through them are foreign nationals. In our schools the game isn't taught at all. It's all about competition kids are selected for the school team and the rest get to play games and receive no tuition on how the game should be played.
I think you tried a little hard to fit players into your own imaginary categories. Sturridge has been nothing but professional since being at Liverpool, and he's constantly working hard on improving himself. Same with Sterling, his attitude has been praised by many of his team mates and managers. Don't know much about Barkley, Oxlade and Shaw but I've never heard of them having any discipline problems?
The best players will come through regardless if they are 1 of 30 english players in an academy or the only English player. Flip it on its head and say, why aren't top clubs abroad trying to poach young English players from our academies? Answer... They aren't good enough and are no better than what they can produce themselves. More English players need to take a risk and learn a few things abroad at 17 or 18 where the coaching and focus is on skill and technique not power and winning at all costs.
Maybe but keep in mind Sturridge's past and his tendency for childish pouting and selfishness, Sterling's off the field troubles, the BR rescue job on both the latter, Shaw's family big gob, barkley's lack of tracking back although his is CM, Ox's repeated fitness issues...
Or since we know said young English players and their clubs won't do this, the FA can give cash incentives to clubs who "twin" and send their youth abroad ... If brains won't work use the English systems default, an abundance of cash......European clubs will take what they consider young crap for enough money..... As long as our coaches are smart enough to know they aren't crap.....
All kids should be made play bare foot in the street with a tennis ball some rich numpty hit over the fence You know if Africa can make 1 or 2 lads kicking rocks we can Incidentally how many African players would you guys say are the technicians we are talking about I would seriously say zero.... Same reason as England strangely, we've tonnes of facilities, we've plenty of coaches of varying ability but I feel we systematically desire the kid who's tallest, fastest, strongest so our u9 team wins 13-0 and we can scream at them to kick the kid who might be good
"so our u9 team wins 13-0 and we can scream at them to kick the kid who might be good" Yea, pretty much this.
It's as simple as banning all competitive games u12 at least 5 a side, small footballs, not keeping score..... And so forth
The thing that gets me are when people say that in 1992 the premier league had 75% of English players and in 2014 we had 33%. In 1992 England didn't win the World Cup or a European Cup, the amount of players didn't make a difference.
Very true RS, from 1966 up to Euro 92 was 7 trophy less tournaments(a couple not even qualified for)during an era when there were fewer foreign players in the English game than today and that never helped England to success. Since 92 until Brazil 2014 England's failure at international level remains as it was before. 48 years of failure.
And let's be real honest here, if the 1966 World Cup wasn't held in England they wouldn't of won it, that was Germany's trophy all tournament long but home advantage edged us.
