Rekik

[kinkylola]

late bloomers are the exception, not the rule. No one should bank on anyone being a late bloomer.

About Rekik ... I'm going to classify this argument into 2 groups. With Ted and against Ted, that's a generalization for simplicity's sake.
What I think the 'against Ted' group does not understand is that Ted is not writing Rekik off right now. He is simply stating this opinion, based on observation of Rekik in games, that he does not currently have the skills necessary to make it at City. WHich is basically saying, at a team that should be chasing every available trophy in a given year. League, Cups, and Chumps league. Have we seen anything to show us that Rekik can play a prominent role in a side with those ambitions? No, we haven't, I don't think anyone can argue that we have.

Rekik does have some things going for him at this point. He has a nice calmness about him, and he has some good skill on the ball. Those are good things to have, especially so young. But that doesn't mean that he is going to be a star CB ... at least not in England ... and not if that's all you've got in your locker. He'll need to improve tackling, heading, and if he can't get faster, he'll have to get a lot more positional awareness. Those are the things we should be looking at during his loan spell, since he will be getting a good run of games, which is excellent for all parties.

The 'with Ted' group are not writing him off. People are arguing over current ability, and potential ability. I believe that Rekik has potential, how much? That is impossible to say. But at some point he's going to have to start delivering on that potential, and he will have to improve on his performance at AC Milan by a large margin if he is going to deliver for City in the arenas we are competing in.

[daveh1962]

So based on one performance in the CL people are writing this 18 year old. Yet they admit they have not watched his regular performances in the Dutch league. They are watching the thread about the watching lad in the Dutch league but have based there judgement and opinion solely based on the one game they have seen on TV. All I can suggest is some people don't ever become talent scouts for the club

Never ever make judgements of a player based on video or TV as you only get the view of the director. You have to watch a player live to see how commanding he is, his positioning when he doesn't have the ball etc.

Unless we have a Messi equivalent on our hands I doubt you will see many under 21's play for City as its not just about being a world class talent but to play for a top premiership side its also about physical and mental strength and not many youngsters have all that before that age.

So let the lad develop over the next few years, let our coaches watch him regularly in the flesh and then lets see if he is good enough BUT lets not rush to judge just yet

I completely disagree with this. Completely.

Name top top player who wasn't at least part of the first team squad (not necesserily starter but at regular on the bench) somewhere at the age of 20.

I could give you a list Terry, Cole, Ferdinand, Carrick none of them were playing for a top 4 side at under 21 or what do you class as a top top player?

Rekik is part of the squad but like many young players he is being sent out on loan to become a more experienced player and a better player. Yes there are players like Rooney and Ronaldo that were 1st team regulars for a top side younger than 21 but they tend to be the exception not the rule.

We know that this club aspires to be the best team in the world. So how many under 21 players are there of world class ability that could cope with the physical rigours of regular first team football in the premiership...not many. I maintain that you will not find many under 21s starting regularly for City.

Top 4 side? Where did I say top 4 side? I said SOMEWHERE, not in top 4 club. All of them were playing regular first team football at the age of 20. Terry was regular starter at the age of 20 and had already broken through to the squad at age of 18. Ashley Cole was regular in Arsenal squad at the age of 20 (one that finished 2nd by the way), Rio Ferdinand was West Ham's player of the year when he was 19, Carrick was part of the squad at 18 and starting every single game at the age of 19. Apart from Carrick they are all "top top players".

You just basically proved my point.

Of course I havent you are being completely obtuse.

This discussion has been about whether Rekik is good enough to play for CITY and the players mentioned I was aware had been playing first team football but these were for clubs outside the top 4. Ashley Cole was by no means a regular for Arsenal at 20 by the way as I think he may have been on loan until he was 21 and then he may have played half the games the following season for Arsenal so hardly a regular

My point is that you wont find many under 21 players good enough to play for City NOT that you wont find players able to find first team football before the age of 21 does that make it easier for you to understand

h

[Dameerto]

late bloomers are the exception, not the rule. No one should bank on anyone being a late bloomer.

About Rekik ... I'm going to classify this argument into 2 groups. With Ted and against Ted, that's a generalization for simplicity's sake.
What I think the 'against Ted' group does not understand is that Ted is not writing Rekik off right now. He is simply stating this opinion, based on observation of Rekik in games, that he does not currently have the skills necessary to make it at City. WHich is basically saying, at a team that should be chasing every available trophy in a given year. League, Cups, and Chumps league. Have we seen anything to show us that Rekik can play a prominent role in a side with those ambitions? No, we haven't, I don't think anyone can argue that we have.

Rekik does have some things going for him at this point. He has a nice calmness about him, and he has some good skill on the ball. Those are good things to have, especially so young. But that doesn't mean that he is going to be a star CB ... at least not in England ... and not if that's all you've got in your locker. He'll need to improve tackling, heading, and if he can't get faster, he'll have to get a lot more positional awareness. Those are the things we should be looking at during his loan spell, since he will be getting a good run of games, which is excellent for all parties.

The 'with Ted' group are not writing him off. People are arguing over current ability, and potential ability. I believe that Rekik has potential, how much? That is impossible to say. But at some point he's going to have to start delivering on that potential, and he will have to improve on his performance at AC Milan by a large margin if he is going to deliver for City in the arenas we are competing in.

And what I think you dont understand is that I dont like reading someone's opinion of a player if it's onesided (whichever side it falls) - it is a waste of my time and it is a pointless waste of pixels.

[Ted Hughes]

So based on one performance in the CL people are writing this 18 year old. Yet they admit they have not watched his regular performances in the Dutch league. They are watching the thread about the watching lad in the Dutch league but have based there judgement and opinion solely based on the one game they have seen on TV. All I can suggest is some people don't ever become talent scouts for the club

Never ever make judgements of a player based on video or TV as you only get the view of the director. You have to watch a player live to see how commanding he is, his positioning when he doesn't have the ball etc.

Unless we have a Messi equivalent on our hands I doubt you will see many under 21's play for City as its not just about being a world class talent but to play for a top premiership side its also about physical and mental strength and not many youngsters have all that before that age.

So let the lad develop over the next few years, let our coaches watch him regularly in the flesh and then lets see if he is good enough BUT lets not rush to judge just yet

I completely disagree with this. Completely.

Name top top player who wasn't at least part of the first team squad (not necesserily starter but at regular on the bench) somewhere at the age of 20.

I could give you a list Terry, Cole, Ferdinand, Carrick none of them were playing for a top 4 side at under 21 or what do you class as a top top player?

Rekik is part of the squad but like many young players he is being sent out on loan to become a more experienced player and a better player. Yes there are players like Rooney and Ronaldo that were 1st team regulars for a top side younger than 21 but they tend to be the exception not the rule.

We know that this club aspires to be the best team in the world. So how many under 21 players are there of world class ability that could cope with the physical rigours of regular first team football in the premiership...not many. I maintain that you will not find many under 21s starting regularly for City.

Top 4 side? Where did I say top 4 side? I said SOMEWHERE, not in top 4 club. All of them were playing regular first team football at the age of 20. Terry was regular starter at the age of 20 and had already broken through to the squad at age of 18. Ashley Cole was regular in Arsenal squad at the age of 20 (one that finished 2nd by the way), Rio Ferdinand was West Ham's player of the year when he was 19, Carrick was part of the squad at 18 and starting every single game at the age of 19. Apart from Carrick they are all "top top players".

You just basically proved my point.

Of course I havent you are being completely obtuse.

This discussion has been about whether Rekik is good enough to play for CITY and the players mentioned I was aware had been playing first team football but these were for clubs outside the top 4. Ashley Cole was by no means a regular for Arsenal at 20 by the way as I think he may have been on loan until he was 21 and then he may have played half the games the following season for Arsenal so hardly a regular

My point is that you wont find many under 21 players good enough to play for City NOT that you wont find players able to find first team football before the age of 21 does that make it easier for you to understand

h

This is complete bollocks mate. You won't find many 21 year olds good enough because there aren't that many 21 year olds good enough. It's got fuck all to do with their age.

Nastasic is 20 for a start & he's not that quick or great in the air, but he can hold his own. If a cb comes along who has the pace & athleticism of Ned & Micah, but is decent on the ball & intelligent, he will start as many games as it's possible to play him, even if he's 17.

It's about ABILITY.

Rekik has a lot of work to do because he is behind the required level physically. I don't see how he can bridge that gap. Nastasic has a much better chance, because he is bigger & quicker, but he's not nailed on either, just 'promising'.

It may be that Rekik learns to be a proper dirty bastard to make up for his lack of pace/jumping ability.

He will have to do something different, because he is not currently on track to be a cb for City, & for City in USA, Blackburn here & PSV v AC he was actually shite.

AND FOR THE RECORD: I NEVER ONCE SAID GET RID OF HIM AND DON'T GIVE HIM A CHANCE. I have been telling people not to assume that he is automatically going to make it; which is TOTALLY DIFFERENT.

I don't know why people can't discuss stuff like this without making bullshit accusations.

[Cocacolajojo1]

What do people think is the breakthrough period in general? And what do people mean with breakthrough?

I read an article once about Zlatan Ibrahimovich which looked at him and another player, Tony Flygare, who was supposedly the next big thing. This was when they were 17-18 I think. Zlatan was seen as promising but lacking in many departments to ever make it as a pro. Tony Flygare on the other hand had it all they said. FLygare was given the chance but blew it while Zlatan was given a tough break, put his head down and worked even harder than before.

A year later or so, at the time of his breakthrough in senior football the team I follow in Sweden, Djurgården, was in the championship of the Swedish League system together with Malmö FF. When they visited our stadium (I think) Zlatan took the ball and dribbled back and forth through the entire Djurgården defense and scored. Then he ran towards the homecrowd's "ultras", put his index-finger in front of his mouth and signalled them to shut up.. At that time anyone who was there knew there and then that he was going to make it big.

But really, how the hell did anyone know that? If someone had warned us about a young Malmö FF-player on the rise like a year earlier, they would have warned us for Flygare. And it's not like what Zlatan did there and then on that pitch or even during that season that made him what he was. He worked hard everywhere he went and I guess he still works hard, although I'd say he's lost his spark since his move to AC Milan.

The same with Henrik Larsson, the other noteworthy striker we've produced in the last 20 years (noteworthy for more than one good world cup anyway). He was also considering quitting football during the year before his breakthrough. It's a good thing he didn't because if he had he'd be a guy with a high school diploma in janitorial duties (no joke). Anyways, I think that if you'd go back in time to when Henrik Larsson was 17-18, his coach would say that he's got something but that he's still lacking.

These are just two examples but I think this happens more often than not, I.E. the players who come good in the end have experienced times at around 17-19, when the competition increases and there are more players for each spot and they just didn't seem up for it. But, they used that adversity in order to realize (or whatever they did) that to become really great in football, you have to learn how to improve every aspecet of your game all the time.

A common critique against the Swedish national youth-team organisation is that it's poor at picking the right players or rather, realizing which players who are going to become the cream of the crop of their year. Fredrik Ljungberg is, I think, the only one who's been consistently picked for the kids and junior national teams and then made his way into the senior national squad. Í think the stories about Zlatan and Henrik Larsson are related to this common critiscism. It's pretty much impossible (or not) to know who'll make the grade until 18-19 and by then, you'll only be able to say that a certain player will have a chance to make it in international football. You can't know.

I don't really know where I'm going with this but I think I'm saying, that I think it's more common than not that players who say, make it to the level of Zlatan and Larsson (the latter being the better player of the two) are probably not the best players in their age-group at the age Rekik is now. I read in Moneyball that the new way of looking at youth players in Baseball is to evalue their ability to do stuff that they can't or probably won't learn at a later age.

What would you guys say such abilities in football are? It was a long time since I read Moneyball but I think they discarded stuff as speed or how hard batters hit the ball at young age. These were thought important but in the end, these skills don't matter much for later development. According to Billie Beane at the time anyways. Players will pick these skills up in the end. Other skills, like reading the next throw from the pitcher is something that is more abstract and harder to learn. Perhaps even intuitive to some. What skills in football are like that would you say? Think defender.

I read another book called moonwalking with Einstein. It says that people who become good at what they do, become good because they go through a lot of hours (10.000-rule) and create an intuitive scanning ability that compares the current situation with the previous ones experienced. Most elite chess players for example decide what move to make in 5 seconds or something like that, not after logically analyzing the board for several minutes. If forced to describe their thoughts they would say stuff like "the structure of the pawns looks a bit strange" and stuff like that. They saw intuitive patterns is what I'm saying, they knew that something was happening but that was thanks to intuition build on experience, not logical thought, at least not primarily.

I think this is Gareth Barry's thing. He just sees defensive issues faster or sharper than anyone else in our squad. Fine, he's slow but he's somehow gathered the skill to read situations based on experience and know when situations are on the verge of becoming dangerous. Like Ted once wrote, some situations with Barry will look routine on the telly but if you watched the field at the stadium and saw the "prologue" to the actual situation that gets broadcasted, you'll realize just how smart a player he is.

Now obviously Rekik can't have this experience yet. We don't know if he'll ever have, because he might not get the right experience or he might just not have the ability to create an intuitive information-bank like Barry. But what abilities in reading the game do you guys think a 19 year old defender should exhibit?

[dazby]

World class post Coco.

[Dameerto]

For breakthrough substitute 'first team experience' (not automatically at his own club) and you wont go far wrong. You could call this season Rekik's breakthrough on that basis. Players will tend to be older when/if considered for OUR first team because of the level expected and needed, and the time required to achieve it.

[Ted Hughes]

What do people think is the breakthrough period in general? And what do people mean with breakthrough?

I read an article once about Zlatan Ibrahimovich which looked at him and another player, Tony Flygare, who was supposedly the next big thing. This was when they were 17-18 I think. Zlatan was seen as promising but lacking in many departments to ever make it as a pro. Tony Flygare on the other hand had it all they said. FLygare was given the chance but blew it while Zlatan was given a tough break, put his head down and worked even harder than before.

A year later or so, at the time of his breakthrough in senior football the team I follow in Sweden, Djurgården, was in the championship of the Swedish League system together with Malmö FF. When they visited our stadium (I think) Zlatan took the ball and dribbled back and forth through the entire Djurgården defense and scored. Then he ran towards the homecrowd's "ultras", put his index-finger in front of his mouth and signalled them to shut up.. At that time anyone who was there knew there and then that he was going to make it big.

But really, how the hell did anyone know that? If someone had warned us about a young Malmö FF-player on the rise like a year earlier, they would have warned us for Flygare. And it's not like what Zlatan did there and then on that pitch or even during that season that made him what he was. He worked hard everywhere he went and I guess he still works hard, although I'd say he's lost his spark since his move to AC Milan.

The same with Henrik Larsson, the other noteworthy striker we've produced in the last 20 years (noteworthy for more than one good world cup anyway). He was also considering quitting football during the year before his breakthrough. It's a good thing he didn't because if he had he'd be a guy with a high school diploma in janitorial duties (no joke). Anyways, I think that if you'd go back in time to when Henrik Larsson was 17-18, his coach would say that he's got something but that he's still lacking.

These are just two examples but I think this happens more often than not, I.E. the players who come good in the end have experienced times at around 17-19, when the competition increases and there are more players for each spot and they just didn't seem up for it. But, they used that adversity in order to realize (or whatever they did) that to become really great in football, you have to learn how to improve every aspecet of your game all the time.

A common critique against the Swedish national youth-team organisation is that it's poor at picking the right players or rather, realizing which players who are going to become the cream of the crop of their year. Fredrik Ljungberg is, I think, the only one who's been consistently picked for the kids and junior national teams and then made his way into the senior national squad. Í think the stories about Zlatan and Henrik Larsson are related to this common critiscism. It's pretty much impossible (or not) to know who'll make the grade until 18-19 and by then, you'll only be able to say that a certain player will have a chance to make it in international football. You can't know.

I don't really know where I'm going with this but I think I'm saying, that I think it's more common than not that players who say, make it to the level of Zlatan and Larsson (the latter being the better player of the two) are probably not the best players in their age-group at the age Rekik is now. I read in Moneyball that the new way of looking at youth players in Baseball is to evalue their ability to do stuff that they can't or probably won't learn at a later age.

What would you guys say such abilities in football are? It was a long time since I read Moneyball but I think they discarded stuff as speed or how hard batters hit the ball at young age. These were thought important but in the end, these skills don't matter much for later development. According to Billie Beane at the time anyways. Players will pick these skills up in the end. Other skills, like reading the next throw from the pitcher is something that is more abstract and harder to learn. Perhaps even intuitive to some. What skills in football are like that would you say? Think defender.

I read another book called moonwalking with Einstein. It says that people who become good at what they do, become good because they go through a lot of hours (10.000-rule) and create an intuitive scanning ability that compares the current situation with the previous ones experienced. Most elite chess players for example decide what move to make in 5 seconds or something like that, not after logically analyzing the board for several minutes. If forced to describe their thoughts they would say stuff like "the structure of the pawns looks a bit strange" and stuff like that. They saw intuitive patterns is what I'm saying, they knew that something was happening but that was thanks to intuition build on experience, not logical thought, at least not primarily.

I think this is Gareth Barry's thing. He just sees defensive issues faster or sharper than anyone else in our squad. Fine, he's slow but he's somehow gathered the skill to read situations based on experience and know when situations are on the verge of becoming dangerous. Like Ted once wrote, some situations with Barry will look routine on the telly but if you watched the field at the stadium and saw the "prologue" to the actual situation that gets broadcasted, you'll realize just how smart a player he is.

Now obviously Rekik can't have this experience yet. We don't know if he'll ever have, because he might not get the right experience or he might just not have the ability to create an intuitive information-bank like Barry. But what abilities in reading the game do you guys think a 19 year old defender should exhibit?

I don't expect a young player at cb to read the game brilliantly unless he is a genius. I would say Rekik is about the average at that. Boyata was similar level at reading the game, but bigger stronger & faster.

I have never known a player to be much faster or jump much higher at 25 than at 18 though, usually the absolute opposite so imo, Rekik won't be. He would have to be very very very clever. Don't see that cleverness so far compared to anyone else.

Imo, brilliant players mostly look brilliant at a young age. Then some stay at the same level or get even better, most get worse. Rekik imo, was brilliant for a 16 year old, but now looks average for an 18 year old.

Someone mentioned Wes Brown earlier; he was twice as good as Rekik at the same age, faster, better in the air, better at reading the game & better on the ball. John O'Shea was about 50% better, big strong decent defender but nothing special. Johhny Evans was also better.

[Douglas Higginbottom]

I would mostly agree with Ted re Rekik.At 16 I thought we had something special on our hands.He was playing well above age group and looked the business.Not necessarily brilliant at anything (heading,reading the game,pace,tackling) but quite strong for his age and easily able to cope with other young players even if 2 or 3 years older.City also thought the same and I believe a certain Patrick Vieira did wax lyrical about him.

To an extent he doesn't seem to have kicked on from the games I have seen him play for City plus feedback from his Pompey loan or games in Holland.But he is still young enough to develop into what was hoped for and playing regularly as he is now at a good standard should be massive for him.Definitely still a real prospect.

[Wonderwall]

I don't expect a young player at cb to read the game brilliantly unless he is a genius. I would say Rekik is about the average at that. Boyata was similar level at reading the game, but bigger stronger & faster.

I have never known a player to be much faster or jump much higher at 25 than at 18 though, usually the absolute opposite so imo, Rekik won't be. He would have to be very very very clever. Don't see that cleverness so far compared to anyone else.

Imo, brilliant players mostly look brilliant at a young age. Then some stay at the same level or get even better, most get worse. Rekik imo, was brilliant for a 16 year old, but now looks average for an 18 year old.

Someone mentioned Wes Brown earlier; he was twice as good as Rekik at the same age, faster, better in the air, better at reading the game & better on the ball. John O'Shea was about 50% better, big strong decent defender but nothing special. Johhny Evans was also better.

This emphasises what coco was saying. He might be able to jump exactly the same height at 18 as he can when he is 25, however at 25 he will learn to time his jump better, to be in a better position to maximise his challenge efficiency. There is no substitute for experience, ala Barry, however, continue to grow in knowledge and experience and reiki will be a good one to keep. IMO

[daveh1962]

So based on one performance in the CL people are writing this 18 year old. Yet they admit they have not watched his regular performances in the Dutch league. They are watching the thread about the watching lad in the Dutch league but have based there judgement and opinion solely based on the one game they have seen on TV. All I can suggest is some people don't ever become talent scouts for the club

Never ever make judgements of a player based on video or TV as you only get the view of the director. You have to watch a player live to see how commanding he is, his positioning when he doesn't have the ball etc.

Unless we have a Messi equivalent on our hands I doubt you will see many under 21's play for City as its not just about being a world class talent but to play for a top premiership side its also about physical and mental strength and not many youngsters have all that before that age.

So let the lad develop over the next few years, let our coaches watch him regularly in the flesh and then lets see if he is good enough BUT lets not rush to judge just yet

I completely disagree with this. Completely.

Name top top player who wasn't at least part of the first team squad (not necesserily starter but at regular on the bench) somewhere at the age of 20.

Right for the last time and then I am done. You highlighted the point I made about it unlikely that any under 21 will play for City. You will note that I have not said that no under 21 will play for any other team I just mention City

You then state that you disagree with that statement completely completely just to emphasise how much you disagreed with me. The reason you disagreed with me because under 21 players have played regular first team football for other teams such as West Ham

So just to reiterate my point for a final time I do not believe that many under 21 players will play for CITY because there are not many world class under 21 players who would be talented and strong enough both physically or mentally to play for CITY in the premier league at that age

[Slim]

So based on one performance in the CL people are writing this 18 year old. Yet they admit they have not watched his regular performances in the Dutch league. They are watching the thread about the watching lad in the Dutch league but have based there judgement and opinion solely based on the one game they have seen on TV. All I can suggest is some people don't ever become talent scouts for the club

Never ever make judgements of a player based on video or TV as you only get the view of the director. You have to watch a player live to see how commanding he is, his positioning when he doesn't have the ball etc.

Unless we have a Messi equivalent on our hands I doubt you will see many under 21's play for City as its not just about being a world class talent but to play for a top premiership side its also about physical and mental strength and not many youngsters have all that before that age.

So let the lad develop over the next few years, let our coaches watch him regularly in the flesh and then lets see if he is good enough BUT lets not rush to judge just yet

I completely disagree with this. Completely.

Name top top player who wasn't at least part of the first team squad (not necesserily starter but at regular on the bench) somewhere at the age of 20.

Right for the last time and then I am done. You highlighted the point I made about it unlikely that any under 21 will play for City. You will note that I have not said that no under 21 will play for any other team I just mention City

You then state that you disagree with that statement completely completely just to emphasise how much you disagreed with me. The reason you disagreed with me because under 21 players have played regular first team football for other teams such as West Ham

So just to reiterate my point for a final time I do not believe that many under 21 players will play for CITY because there are not many world class under 21 players who would be talented and strong enough both physically or mentally to play for CITY in the premier league at that age

Like Nastasic, who according to you is world class, I'm sure he'd be delighted to hear that.

[Beefymcfc]

Let's face it, 99% of our youth products will not make it at City in the near future, that's ut and dry. So, the question is, for the likes of Rekik et al, do we just give up on bringing those 99% through and concentrate only on the 1% who are showing real signs of making it in their position?

[Ted Hughes]

I don't expect a young player at cb to read the game brilliantly unless he is a genius. I would say Rekik is about the average at that. Boyata was similar level at reading the game, but bigger stronger & faster.

I have never known a player to be much faster or jump much higher at 25 than at 18 though, usually the absolute opposite so imo, Rekik won't be. He would have to be very very very clever. Don't see that cleverness so far compared to anyone else.

Imo, brilliant players mostly look brilliant at a young age. Then some stay at the same level or get even better, most get worse. Rekik imo, was brilliant for a 16 year old, but now looks average for an 18 year old.

Someone mentioned Wes Brown earlier; he was twice as good as Rekik at the same age, faster, better in the air, better at reading the game & better on the ball. John O'Shea was about 50% better, big strong decent defender but nothing special. Johhny Evans was also better.

This emphasises what coco was saying. He might be able to jump exactly the same height at 18 as he can when he is 25, however at 25 he will learn to time his jump better, to be in a better position to maximise his challenge efficiency. There is no substitute for experience, ala Barry, however, continue to grow in knowledge and experience and reiki will be a good one to keep. IMO

That's what I'm saying; he would have to develop the football intelligence & knwhow, so that he can use his body in a way to compete with Crouch in the air & Sturridge on the ground, because he hasn't got the size or pace to force them out.

Now that's not impossble, but he has so far shown no sign of being any more savvy than anyone else.

Is it something he can learn in one season ? Two ? Once again; a big ask.
Will City allow him to get 'done' on headers etc in our team for several years whilst he picks up that knowledge ? Not a chance in hell, & this forum would go into meltdown if they did.

So he has to learn John Terry type snideyness or put on two yards of pace & two feet of jumping ability in 1 or 2 seasons on loan, if he's to play for us.

Is that really likely ?

Imo if he's still at City in two seasons, he'll be a def mid or a fullback, but I recon it's more likely he will be sold, poss part ex for that kid PSV have upfront who DOES look a potential genius at 17.

[Ted Hughes]

Let's face it, 99% of our youth products will not make it at City in the near future, that's ut and dry. So, the question is, for the likes of Rekik et al, do we just give up on bringing those 99% through and concentrate only on the 1% who are showing real signs of making it in their position?

If there are better kids coming through then absolutely yes. If not you give them a bit longer. We have got a shipload of kids & some need moving on so we can see who has what it takes. Rekik has to be continually evaluated compared not just to players we have, but also players we may sign.

So long as he gets a chance of making it somewhere, then it is good rep for our system, even if he goes elsewhere.

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

What do people think is the breakthrough period in general? And what do people mean with breakthrough?

I read an article once about Zlatan Ibrahimovich which looked at him and another player, Tony Flygare, who was supposedly the next big thing. This was when they were 17-18 I think. Zlatan was seen as promising but lacking in many departments to ever make it as a pro. Tony Flygare on the other hand had it all they said. FLygare was given the chance but blew it while Zlatan was given a tough break, put his head down and worked even harder than before.

A year later or so, at the time of his breakthrough in senior football the team I follow in Sweden, Djurgården, was in the championship of the Swedish League system together with Malmö FF. When they visited our stadium (I think) Zlatan took the ball and dribbled back and forth through the entire Djurgården defense and scored. Then he ran towards the homecrowd's "ultras", put his index-finger in front of his mouth and signalled them to shut up.. At that time anyone who was there knew there and then that he was going to make it big.

But really, how the hell did anyone know that? If someone had warned us about a young Malmö FF-player on the rise like a year earlier, they would have warned us for Flygare. And it's not like what Zlatan did there and then on that pitch or even during that season that made him what he was. He worked hard everywhere he went and I guess he still works hard, although I'd say he's lost his spark since his move to AC Milan.

The same with Henrik Larsson, the other noteworthy striker we've produced in the last 20 years (noteworthy for more than one good world cup anyway). He was also considering quitting football during the year before his breakthrough. It's a good thing he didn't because if he had he'd be a guy with a high school diploma in janitorial duties (no joke). Anyways, I think that if you'd go back in time to when Henrik Larsson was 17-18, his coach would say that he's got something but that he's still lacking.

These are just two examples but I think this happens more often than not, I.E. the players who come good in the end have experienced times at around 17-19, when the competition increases and there are more players for each spot and they just didn't seem up for it. But, they used that adversity in order to realize (or whatever they did) that to become really great in football, you have to learn how to improve every aspecet of your game all the time.

A common critique against the Swedish national youth-team organisation is that it's poor at picking the right players or rather, realizing which players who are going to become the cream of the crop of their year. Fredrik Ljungberg is, I think, the only one who's been consistently picked for the kids and junior national teams and then made his way into the senior national squad. Í think the stories about Zlatan and Henrik Larsson are related to this common critiscism. It's pretty much impossible (or not) to know who'll make the grade until 18-19 and by then, you'll only be able to say that a certain player will have a chance to make it in international football. You can't know.

I don't really know where I'm going with this but I think I'm saying, that I think it's more common than not that players who say, make it to the level of Zlatan and Larsson (the latter being the better player of the two) are probably not the best players in their age-group at the age Rekik is now. I read in Moneyball that the new way of looking at youth players in Baseball is to evalue their ability to do stuff that they can't or probably won't learn at a later age.

What would you guys say such abilities in football are? It was a long time since I read Moneyball but I think they discarded stuff as speed or how hard batters hit the ball at young age. These were thought important but in the end, these skills don't matter much for later development. According to Billie Beane at the time anyways. Players will pick these skills up in the end. Other skills, like reading the next throw from the pitcher is something that is more abstract and harder to learn. Perhaps even intuitive to some. What skills in football are like that would you say? Think defender.

I read another book called moonwalking with Einstein. It says that people who become good at what they do, become good because they go through a lot of hours (10.000-rule) and create an intuitive scanning ability that compares the current situation with the previous ones experienced. Most elite chess players for example decide what move to make in 5 seconds or something like that, not after logically analyzing the board for several minutes. If forced to describe their thoughts they would say stuff like "the structure of the pawns looks a bit strange" and stuff like that. They saw intuitive patterns is what I'm saying, they knew that something was happening but that was thanks to intuition build on experience, not logical thought, at least not primarily.

I think this is Gareth Barry's thing. He just sees defensive issues faster or sharper than anyone else in our squad. Fine, he's slow but he's somehow gathered the skill to read situations based on experience and know when situations are on the verge of becoming dangerous. Like Ted once wrote, some situations with Barry will look routine on the telly but if you watched the field at the stadium and saw the "prologue" to the actual situation that gets broadcasted, you'll realize just how smart a player he is.

Now obviously Rekik can't have this experience yet. We don't know if he'll ever have, because he might not get the right experience or he might just not have the ability to create an intuitive information-bank like Barry. But what abilities in reading the game do you guys think a 19 year old defender should exhibit?

Pace, first touch, ability to look up while you have football on your feet, one touch passing ability, agility and jumping. Those are talents that are so deep in your backbone or in the case of pace, agility and jumping something you were born with and developed at an early age. Those are all talents virtually impossible to teach for anyone over 18. Sure you can hone them just teeny tiny bit. I mean sprinter who runs 10.1 100 meter at the age of 18 could well become 9.80 runner in the future but if you are running 12.1 at the age of 18 you will never break the 10 second barrier. NEVER. That's just not going to happen.

Now reading the game or even positioning, while somewhat instinctive, can be developed. But if you don't have the pace you will never be in position where you know you should be. If you always look down the ball when you are trapping it, you will never become David Silva. Ever. It's a habit so deep in your backbone and even if in theory you fully realise where you should place the pass next, you will never have enough time to actually do it.

People like to think that with good enough coaching staff and surroundings you could take any kid off the street and make him top professional footballer. But that's not how it works. Most of the work has already been done when they are being brought to Academy at the age of 14 or 16 or whatever. All there is left to do is to hone that top end raw material into end product.

It's funny that Nedum was brought up. A great example. He had straight line speed and strength and intelligence and great attitude and even reasonable passing ability. But his first touch was always horrible. And still is. And his agility was only average which shows when he is turning around. And I'm 100% certain that it wasn't about lack of effort or poor coaching that blocked his way to very top. Also Rio Ferdinand was mentioned, and I hate to praise that rag cunt, but he had it all pace, great touch, nice vision, agility... the lot. Now in his early years he made tons of stupid mistakes and being stupid as a boot it took him years to get the tactical side but eventually when he joined rags they thought him that part as well. Because it can be thought.

[zuricity]

Pace, first touch, ability to look up while you have football on your feet, one touch passing ability, agility and jumping. Those are talents that are so deep in your backbone or in the case of pace, agility and jumping something you were born with and developed at an early age. Those are all talents virtually impossible to teach for anyone over 18. Sure you can hone them just teeny tiny bit. I mean sprinter who runs 10.1 100 meter at the age of 18 could well become 9.80 runner in the future but if you are running 12.1 at the age of 18 you will never break the 10 second barrier. NEVER. That's just not going to happen.

Now reading the game or even positioning, while somewhat instinctive, can be developed. But if you don't have the pace you will never be in position where you know you should be. If you always look down the ball when you are trapping it, you will never become David Silva. Ever. It's a habit so deep in your backbone and even if in theory you fully realise where you should place the pass next, you will never have enough time to actually do it.

People like to think that with good enough coaching staff and surroundings you could take any kid off the street and make him top professional footballer. But that's not how it works. Most of the work has already been done when they are being brought to Academy at the age of 14 or 16 or whatever. All there is left to do is to hone that top end raw material into end product.

It's funny that Nedum was brought up. A great example. He had straight line speed and strength and intelligence and great attitude and even reasonable passing ability. But his first touch was always horrible. And still is. And his agility was only average which shows when he is turning around. And I'm 100% certain that it wasn't about lack of effort or poor coaching that blocked his way to very top. Also Rio Ferdinand was mentioned, and I hate to praise that rag cunt, but he had it all pace, great touch, nice vision, agility... the lot. Now in his early years he made tons of stupid mistakes and being stupid as a boot it took him years to get the tactical side but eventually when he joined rags they thought him that part as well. Because it can be thought.

Pace , ability to look up with ball at your feet ?

I was doing that as a kid , still didn't make it . Thank God!

As Carl said in another thread , utter , utter crap.

Leave the poor lad alone and let him develop.
If i was in his shoes i'd want to slap the sad arse internet jocks that think they know anything about football

Enough said .

[Ted Hughes]

Pace, first touch, ability to look up while you have football on your feet, one touch passing ability, agility and jumping. Those are talents that are so deep in your backbone or in the case of pace, agility and jumping something you were born with and developed at an early age. Those are all talents virtually impossible to teach for anyone over 18. Sure you can hone them just teeny tiny bit. I mean sprinter who runs 10.1 100 meter at the age of 18 could well become 9.80 runner in the future but if you are running 12.1 at the age of 18 you will never break the 10 second barrier. NEVER. That's just not going to happen.

Now reading the game or even positioning, while somewhat instinctive, can be developed. But if you don't have the pace you will never be in position where you know you should be. If you always look down the ball when you are trapping it, you will never become David Silva. Ever. It's a habit so deep in your backbone and even if in theory you fully realise where you should place the pass next, you will never have enough time to actually do it.

People like to think that with good enough coaching staff and surroundings you could take any kid off the street and make him top professional footballer. But that's not how it works. Most of the work has already been done when they are being brought to Academy at the age of 14 or 16 or whatever. All there is left to do is to hone that top end raw material into end product.

It's funny that Nedum was brought up. A great example. He had straight line speed and strength and intelligence and great attitude and even reasonable passing ability. But his first touch was always horrible. And still is. And his agility was only average which shows when he is turning around. And I'm 100% certain that it wasn't about lack of effort or poor coaching that blocked his way to very top. Also Rio Ferdinand was mentioned, and I hate to praise that rag cunt, but he had it all pace, great touch, nice vision, agility... the lot. Now in his early years he made tons of stupid mistakes and being stupid as a boot it took him years to get the tactical side but eventually when he joined rags they thought him that part as well. Because it can be thought.

Pace , ability to look up with ball at your feet ?

I was doing that as a kid , still didn't make it . Thank God!

As Carl said in another thread , utter , utter crap.

Leave the poor lad alone and let him develop.
If i was in his shoes i'd want to slap the sad arse internet jocks that think they know anything about football

Enough said .

We don't choose who develops or who doesn't, we have no power, 'the lad' isn't being fucking harrassed by us, he is in fucking Holland, playing for PSV, all we are doing is discussing football, you know, as in: 'ON A FUCKING FOOTBALL FORUM'.

If everybody was like you, it would just need one post saying 'isn't it great ?' and 2000 fucking sheep pressing a 'like' button.

[Niall Quinns Discopants]

Pace, first touch, ability to look up while you have football on your feet, one touch passing ability, agility and jumping. Those are talents that are so deep in your backbone or in the case of pace, agility and jumping something you were born with and developed at an early age. Those are all talents virtually impossible to teach for anyone over 18. Sure you can hone them just teeny tiny bit. I mean sprinter who runs 10.1 100 meter at the age of 18 could well become 9.80 runner in the future but if you are running 12.1 at the age of 18 you will never break the 10 second barrier. NEVER. That's just not going to happen.

Now reading the game or even positioning, while somewhat instinctive, can be developed. But if you don't have the pace you will never be in position where you know you should be. If you always look down the ball when you are trapping it, you will never become David Silva. Ever. It's a habit so deep in your backbone and even if in theory you fully realise where you should place the pass next, you will never have enough time to actually do it.

People like to think that with good enough coaching staff and surroundings you could take any kid off the street and make him top professional footballer. But that's not how it works. Most of the work has already been done when they are being brought to Academy at the age of 14 or 16 or whatever. All there is left to do is to hone that top end raw material into end product.

It's funny that Nedum was brought up. A great example. He had straight line speed and strength and intelligence and great attitude and even reasonable passing ability. But his first touch was always horrible. And still is. And his agility was only average which shows when he is turning around. And I'm 100% certain that it wasn't about lack of effort or poor coaching that blocked his way to very top. Also Rio Ferdinand was mentioned, and I hate to praise that rag cunt, but he had it all pace, great touch, nice vision, agility... the lot. Now in his early years he made tons of stupid mistakes and being stupid as a boot it took him years to get the tactical side but eventually when he joined rags they thought him that part as well. Because it can be thought.

Pace , ability to look up with ball at your feet ?

I was doing that as a kid , still didn't make it . Thank God!

As Carl said in another thread , utter , utter crap.

Leave the poor lad alone and let him develop.
If i was in his shoes i'd want to slap the sad arse internet jocks that think they know anything about football

Enough said .

We don't choose who develops or who doesn't, we have no power, 'the lad' isn't being fucking harrassed by us, he is in fucking Holland, playing for PSV, all we are doing is discussing football, you know, as in: 'ON A FUCKING FOOTBALL FORUM'.

If everybody was like you, it would just need one post saying 'isn't it great ?' and 2000 fucking sheep pressing a 'like' button.

I don't get this either. Hardcore happy clappers group strike again.

Why shouldn't people be able to discuss about his talents? It's not like anyone is giving him Kolarov treatment (ie "wish your cunt of a mother had had that abortion she was planning"). People seem to be breaking down his game andntrying to evaluate whether in future he has what it takes to make it with us. Guy is 18 year old PROFESSIONAL footballer already probably earning more than most here. If he would wander here and read this stuff, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't cry himself to sleep. And if he did, he probably wouldn't have the mental toughness needed anyway.

Of course the funny bit is that MY POST WASN'T ABOUT FUCKING KARIM REKIK. I just answered the question posted by Coke. Not once in this topic have I told my opinion of Rekik. I do have some sort of opinion about him based on the times I've seen him in Championship and that half a PSV game I catched but who dares to post their opinions about anything anymore when you get flooded by these silly passive-aggressive posts by happy clapper brigade.

[Cocacolajojo1]

Pace, first touch, ability to look up while you have football on your feet, one touch passing ability, agility and jumping. Those are talents that are so deep in your backbone or in the case of pace, agility and jumping something you were born with and developed at an early age. Those are all talents virtually impossible to teach for anyone over 18. Sure you can hone them just teeny tiny bit. I mean sprinter who runs 10.1 100 meter at the age of 18 could well become 9.80 runner in the future but if you are running 12.1 at the age of 18 you will never break the 10 second barrier. NEVER. That's just not going to happen.

But what about defending then? And when it comes to jumping, I agree with you but you have to take into consideration that people who stand out at for example u-16 or summat are not seldom further in their growth than most of their teammates and opponents in that age-group. Sure, it doesn't matter that much as it does when someone is ten years old and ahead of his age group in height or muscular build but it does matter.

Also, jump-height must be possible to develop quite a bit when you're past 18. Look at people who do high jump for example. They progress quite a bit after they're done with the junior championship and such.

People like to think that with good enough coaching staff and surroundings you could take any kid off the street and make him top professional footballer. But that's not how it works. Most of the work has already been done when they are being brought to Academy at the age of 14 or 16 or whatever. All there is left to do is to hone that top end raw material into end product.

Sure, a lot is done but considering how many youth-stars fail to make the grade in the end, there's a hell of a lot to reach those next levels. When I recorded an EP with a band a few years ago, the studio technician told us that his philosophy was that you can spend 48 hours on a track and then it's at 95 % of how good it could be mixed. After that, regardless of how much time you spend on mixing that track you won't up the quality by more than five percent, if even that.

Convert that philosophy to football and fine, it's only five percent but it seems a lot. Messi is a good example. If he had stagnated at 18-19 he would still be a great player but he's kept on developing year per year and a couple of years ago it seems he reached a new, in my opinion completely different level than when he broke through and terrorized defences with Eto and Ronaldinho.

There might not be that much to do after 18 but a lot of players will fail to take that last step. I don't know if I read your post wrong but I felt you minimized the next step and how much players must improve themselves if they want to take the step from promise to becoming a regular in a top side, even in a regular side in the Swedish Allsvenska. Young football players stagnate or even go back in development extremely often. Sadly enough.

Also Rio Ferdinand was mentioned, and I hate to praise that rag cunt, but he had it all pace, great touch, nice vision, agility... the lot. Now in his early years he made tons of stupid mistakes and being stupid as a boot it took him years to get the tactical side but eventually when he joined rags they thought him that part as well. Because it can be thought.

Good example NQPD. Would you care to develop in more detail, if you still remember that is, what Rio had before he game to United. Brazilian clubs think like this as well by the way. Attacking skills can't be taught. Defensive skills can.