It quite simply comes down to coaching at a young age - I am sure there are still loads of kids playing football, but you just look at the lack of technical ability of a lot of current players, and that's where the problem lies. It should not be difficult to produce players who can cope with the physical side of the game, as well as producing skillful players - many countries in Europe seem able to do it.

And can we teach players to use BOTH feet from a young age - they need to practice with their weaker foot from a young age. It still makes me laugh when commentators go on about this - players getting paid millions and can only kick with one foot. Teach them the basic skills well from a young age, and you'll reap the rewards.

England havent produced top class talent for yonks.

You can name world class players this country has come up with in the last 40 years on one hand.

This is nothing new.

England havent produced top class talent for yonks.
---------

And this is why when England does produce some good footballers, it leads to them being massively overrated by our fans and media - see Gerrard, Lampard, Rooney.

Even Paul Scholes - a world class footballer and a legend at this club - gets overrated, as people try to compare his technical ability to players such as Xavi, Iniesta, Zidane et al, and he simply isn't in their league.

Gazza is the last technically gifted English player that can compare to them, such a shame he never had the mentality to go with it.

Agree with that.

Gazza was the best English player of his generation. So was Scholes.

We have had others in the past but England managers wouldn't play them. Matt le Tis come to mind. Going further back, even Hoddle was underused by England.

And this is why when England
does produce some good
footballers, it leads to them being
massively overrated by our fans
and media - see Gerrard,
Lampard, Rooney.
Even Paul Scholes - a world class
footballer and a legend at this
club - gets overrated, as people
try to compare his technical
ability to players such as Xavi,
Iniesta, Zidane et al, and he
simply isn't in their league.
Gazza is the last technically gifted
English player that can compare
to them, such a shame he never
had the mentality to go with it.
------------------------------------

Hmm.... I can't say I disagree with your comment but you must be the only United fan who thinks that about Scholes.

"Also, the object of the game would be to win, so competativeness would need to be introduced and we might need to overcome the namby pamby establishment."

------------------------------------

Have to disagree with this. We need to do the opposite. The 'win by any means' policy that is installed into kids from an early age leads to kids being told to boot it up the pitch so the big/large/chubby guy can bully his way through to score. It might make 'coach' happy but it sure doesn't improve the football in this country. These kids need to learn the technical skills that will lead to us having a good team in the future rather than winning their under 10s 4th round match!

we need to ban Dads from the sidelines of under 10s, 4th round matches, to give qualified Boys Club coaches a chance to work on these kids.

mthierry (U7482)
I rate Scholes very highly, one of my favourite players. And it is because of his technical brillance I do so. However, I do feel that he isn't at the level of the aforementioned. No disrespect to him, it is just that I rate them players higher - their exploits in the CL and World Cup have led me to this conclusion.

Also, smaller pitches, more emphasis on tecnical ability.

Not on those that are strong or fast.

Heskeys of this world shouldnt be footballers

Stretty, I've done coaching with under 10s. Nightmare.

The English consensus of Dads is that the big 'uns who can put it about should be picked over than the fairies that try and show boat.

We've got no chance.

I don't think players is the problem with England. It's clubs players play for. The more diverse your players selection is from club the less they'll perform as a team.

My suggestion would be to pick players from the most successful club of the season with few other players from other teams. Overrating players is a problem but I don't think it's much.

Spain have always had technically gifted players but only won their first trophy in 2008 after picking players from mostly Barcelona.

I agree with honestlivpool_five_times (U1661). Look at the starting 11 of Spain and most are from one team. All they have to do is really pick the replacements to fill in for the non-spanish players in the Barca line up (barring the keeper).

Now we could do something like or what the Germans have done. I do think the Spain approach would be better for us. But the issue is which team has around 5-6 players that are English in their (constant) starting line-up that have experience playing at the very top (CL)?

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

"Also, the object of the game would be to win, so competativeness would need to be introduced and we might need to overcome the namby pamby establishment."

------------------------------------

Have to disagree with this. We need to do the opposite. The 'win by any means' policy

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Erm, spot the difference

"Also, the object of the game would be to win, so competativeness would need to be introduced and we might need to overcome the namby pamby establishment."

------------------------------------

Have to disagree with this. We need to do the opposite. The 'win by any means' policy

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Erm, spot the difference

------------------

that you missed out half his sentence?

The 'win' mentality from youth coaches is what's spoiling youth football IMO - not solely, but it's a big problem. I see it every Sunday, coaches screaming at players to 'pass the ball', 'stay in position' etc - teams that are organised and play as a unit generally do well, but at the expense of just letting a kid go on a mazy and score. Any time a kid tries to take on a player and loses the ball, he's immediately berated by the coach, to the point that a kid gets the ball, he just looks to pass it on to avoid any risk of getting told off.

We had a really interesting talk and session with the Man United youth coach who came up, top bloke, can't remember his name. He basically said, as soon as the match is underway, he just lets them get on with it. No shouting from the sidelines, just let them play. He'd rather see a kid try and take a player on, do a stepover, fall on his face, but next time make it - it's the only way they'll learn the skill, and be comfortable on the ball, and learn themselves when to try a trick, when to pass, when to risk taking a player on.

We all remember playing in the school playground, when did you ever pass the ball, you got it and went on a mazy run? Normally with a tennis ball. That's where we learned to keep control of, and be comfortable on, the ball. And we enjoyed ourselves. Our kids barely get a chance to have a 20-a-side game in the playground anymore without someone pulling them up for being too rowdy.

The fun's being taken out of kids football, we're trying to impose 'adult' tactics and organisation onto the kids game.

Let 'em get on with it... they'll learn on their own, and get the basics themselves. Time for the grown up stuff when they're older.

Rant over. Sorry, got a bee in my bonnet about youth coaching!

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Anfield RAP, the Spanish system huh ?

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

I happened to be at the Ajax's youth Academy a few weeks ago (work related).

The set-up is fantastic and there were hundreds of kids from all ages. As a club Ajax have a 'link' with numerous schools (primary to secondary) all over the country and send out coaches and staff to help out with the football lessons in PE and to keep their eye on any potential talent.

In Holland all sport is taken seriously and especially in the schools. The education system here sees kids being active with sports at school as a direct 'release' from normal schoolwork resulting in both better grades and more 'talent' being found in the sports world

If that ever happened I guess that the big clubs would stop loaning out their youngsters to lower division clubs. I like the loan system, it forces the youngsters to adapt to a whole new system, and I think it can be benefic for their progress. The loan system can also help lower division clubs to promotion, and if the loaned players perform well, it's a huge boost in confidence.
On the other side, the youngsters would play week-in week-out as a team against senior players, which can also be benefic.

I agree with Bring Back Rushies Moustache. The biggest problem is that we don't nurture skills in the way our more successful rivals do.

This is partly the opposite of the supposed 'politically correct non-competitive' trend the OP bemoans. It is because of the focus on winning that big, strong cloggers get promoted above kids with skills and imagination with the ball but haven't had their growth spurts yet. We have lines of dads watching 11-a-side matches, screaming 'get stuck in' when Dutch and Spanish kids of the same age are playing on small pitches in games designed to give each one more touches of the ball. Do the Spanish kids care about winning less than ours? I doubt it. But they certainly pick up the technical skills much better. You see this at every level - from a bunch of lads having a kick around on holiday to the national teams.

Another reason for our inferior cultivation of skill is the rule book which restrict the time English clubs' academies can spend teaching the game to kids. Barcelona get to basically work with kids full-time and build their education around the football, whereas in this country it is more or less the opposite.

The other great flaw in our system is access to places where you can play. We can thank the Tories for selling off thousands of school playing fields (not that Labour did anything to rectify this). More generally, the political consensus since Thatcher's time has been that big public investment isn't a good thing, that we should let the market free, make people richer, tax them less and let them decide what to spend their money on. That's a quesiton of political philosophy and everyone is free to take their own positions. I'm more on the left and believe that it would be good if the state provided e.g. good, cheap sports facilities for young people (apart from the benefit to our competitiveness in sports, it should reduce the health bills over the next few generations as obesity becomes one of the biggest killers).

As for the health and safety question, I feel ambivalent. On one hand, I think it's important for kids to encounter a certain amount of risk so they learn how to make sensible choices. H&S regulation can be officious and intrusive. On the other hand, I have four year-old twins and I know I'd be furious if either of them got injured because they weren't properly supervised or because some piece of equipment wasn't safe. Our perspectives change a lot when we become parents. I've also been to lots of countries with poor or zero H&S legislation and I wouldn't idealise the freedom you have to be randomly maimed by bits of sharp metal sticking out of the pavement, etc. H&S isn't a bad thing, but I agree that a balance needs to be found.

Whether H&S has anything to do with the quality of our footballers I have no idea. We weren't exactly world beaters in the 70s and 80s, with a generation of footballers who would have played football on frozen December pitches in their 1960s childhoods. It would be interesting to compare how intrusive H&S is across our footballing rivals. Do the Dutch play in the rain? (Or do they play on indoor pitches most of the time anyway?) I guess rain isn't such an issue in Spain, except mainly on the plain...

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Comment deleted by Site Moderator