EDS/Academy Games

[Ted Hughes]

I completely disagree about allowing the keeper to kick the ball long. If there is absolutely no option then it is fair enough but Vieira wasn't bollocking anybody for that, I saw the incident in question & saw the pass he should have made & thought myself that he had taken the easy way out. Lumping it because the defenders are not good enough to control the ball or the midfielders are not dropping into the spaces to play it out, is absolutely not the answer. If they are allowed to do that, then they will just lump it, full stop, whenever it becomes difficult.

What City want, is players who find a way to overcome that difficulty, which you absolutely can, 90% ot the time if you are smart enough & confident enough. But it has to be something they learn to do under pressure. The first team can't do it. Barca's can. Those who are not capable of doing it at City, will have to go & play for somebody else once this is fully implemented.

Vieira is giving them the opportunity to try & earn a place at our club. That's his job, not winning trophies; that's a secondary target.

I understand that Ted, but the bollocking made Gunn have to play it short when it WASNT the right option. We were put under unnecessary pressure many times on the night by the philosophy of having to play it short no matter what. Porto were aware of this and pressed us and if their front man was better they would have beaten us as they got possession high up the field from our holistic bullshit.

It was never impossible. It was purely down to poor pass selection, ball control & lack of options. There was never a case when intelligent, skillful play couldn't have retained us the ball. Passing it to the fullback when he has no way to return it & no out ball, does not fall into that catagory, nor does a midfield player recieving the ball & flicking it on blindly to the opposition, or actually assuming he is being closed down & passing straight back to the keeper when he has time to turn & pass forward. All of these things were happening regularly, due to poor play, which is below the level most of these lads are capable of. Same v Chelsea.

If we allow them to bottle out at the first sign of pressure, the whole thing becomes a waste of time. It is exactly at times like this that they need to learn it & when they got it right, they were able to escape the Porto pressing, which they could have done pretty much every time, with composure, skill & intelligence. Vieira can show them that on the video. If they can't do it, they are not good enough.

[Wonderwall]

I completely disagree about allowing the keeper to kick the ball long. If there is absolutely no option then it is fair enough but Vieira wasn't bollocking anybody for that, I saw the incident in question & saw the pass he should have made & thought myself that he had taken the easy way out. Lumping it because the defenders are not good enough to control the ball or the midfielders are not dropping into the spaces to play it out, is absolutely not the answer. If they are allowed to do that, then they will just lump it, full stop, whenever it becomes difficult.

What City want, is players who find a way to overcome that difficulty, which you absolutely can, 90% ot the time if you are smart enough & confident enough. But it has to be something they learn to do under pressure. The first team can't do it. Barca's can. Those who are not capable of doing it at City, will have to go & play for somebody else once this is fully implemented.

Vieira is giving them the opportunity to try & earn a place at our club. That's his job, not winning trophies; that's a secondary target.

I understand that Ted, but the bollocking made Gunn have to play it short when it WASNT the right option. We were put under unnecessary pressure many times on the night by the philosophy of having to play it short no matter what. Porto were aware of this and pressed us and if their front man was better they would have beaten us as they got possession high up the field from our holistic bullshit.

It was never impossible.It was purely down to poor pass selection, ball control & lack of options. There was never a case when intelligent, skillful play couldn't have retained us the ball. Passing it to the fullback when he has no way to return it & no out ball, does not fall into that catagory, nor does a midfield player recieving the ball & flicking it on blindly to the opposition, or actually assuming he is being closed down & passing straight back to the keeper when he has time to turn & pass forward. All of these things were happening regularly, due to poor play, which is below the level most of these lads are capable of. Same v Chelsea.

If we allow them to bottle out at the first sign of pressure, the whole thing becomes a waste of time. It is exactly at times like this that they need to learn it & when they got it right, they were able to escape the Porto pressing, which they could have done pretty much every time, with composure, skill & intelligence. Vieira can show them that on the video. If they can't do it, they are not good enough.

This is exactly it Ted, it should be down to Gunn to make the decision at that split second with regards to what was right at that time. Porto were closing us down, why wasn't Vieira screaming at Byrne and Glendon to support the keeper by getting into the positions to give him options, for me that is what he should have been doing as they were both terrible and static when Gunn had the ball. There were so many times when the there was a huge space between the defence the midfield of about 40 yds.

Decision making is just as important as being able to pass the ball. I also remember the incident very well, I was pissed off at Vieira's decision to bollock Gunn, when he should have bollocked the midfield IMO!

[Ted Hughes]

There was a pass on & he shat it. I can't remember who to, but I remember I could clearly see it at the time wondering why he had hoofed the ball away, & Vieira having a word, which I thought was good tbh. I wouldn't call it a bollocking anyhow, it was just the kind of gesticulation to 'play' thing like Mancini used to do when the first team lumped it needlessly.

[twosips]

Gunn's a great young prospect and by all accounts he has a great mentality too. I don't think he's even slightly bothered by Vieiras gesticulations fortunately. Wilcox is equally tough with the u18s. I guess you have to be with kids. Tough but fair. I'm sure anything Vieira or Wilcox does is at least consistent with pre-match rhetoric, just reinforcing those ideas.

[iwasthere2012]

I completely disagree about allowing the keeper to kick the ball long. If there is absolutely no option then it is fair enough but Vieira wasn't bollocking anybody for that, I saw the incident in question & saw the pass he should have made & thought myself that he had taken the easy way out. Lumping it because the defenders are not good enough to control the ball or the midfielders are not dropping into the spaces to play it out, is absolutely not the answer. If they are allowed to do that, then they will just lump it, full stop, whenever it becomes difficult.

What City want, is players who find a way to overcome that difficulty, which you absolutely can, 90% ot the time if you are smart enough & confident enough. But it has to be something they learn to do under pressure. The first team can't do it. Barca's can. Those who are not capable of doing it at City, will have to go & play for somebody else once this is fully implemented.

Vieira is giving them the opportunity to try & earn a place at our club. That's his job, not winning trophies; that's a secondary target.

I understand that Ted, but the bollocking made Gunn have to play it short when it WASNT the right option. We were put under unnecessary pressure many times on the night by the philosophy of having to play it short no matter what. Porto were aware of this and pressed us and if their front man was better they would have beaten us as they got possession high up the field from our holistic bullshit.

It was never impossible.It was purely down to poor pass selection, ball control & lack of options. There was never a case when intelligent, skillful play couldn't have retained us the ball. Passing it to the fullback when he has no way to return it & no out ball, does not fall into that catagory, nor does a midfield player recieving the ball & flicking it on blindly to the opposition, or actually assuming he is being closed down & passing straight back to the keeper when he has time to turn & pass forward. All of these things were happening regularly, due to poor play, which is below the level most of these lads are capable of. Same v Chelsea.

If we allow them to bottle out at the first sign of pressure, the whole thing becomes a waste of time. It is exactly at times like this that they need to learn it & when they got it right, they were able to escape the Porto pressing, which they could have done pretty much every time, with composure, skill & intelligence. Vieira can show them that on the video. If they can't do it, they are not good enough.

This is exactly it Ted, it should be down to Gunn to make the decision at that split second with regards to what was right at that time. Porto were closing us down, why wasn't Vieira screaming at Byrne and Glendon to support the keeper by getting into the positions to give him options, for me that is what he should have been doing as they were both terrible and static when Gunn had the ball. There were so many times when the there was a huge space between the defence the midfield of about 40 yds.

Decision making is just as important as being able to pass the ball. I also remember the incident very well, I was pissed off at Vieira's decision to bollock Gunn, when he should have bollocked the midfield IMO!

I didn't see this game so can't comment on the incident described, but I did see the Chelsea v City games and Haug in goal seemed to have the same choice and invariably played the risky pass that wasn't on and we put ourselves in all sorts of bother as a result.
It's a tricky one lads. I can see exactly where you are coming from Ted and it is The City way and it is to be admired. I however, did feel the same frustrations as Wonderwall while watching the Chelsea final. For me, I think the frustration really was that from the little I've seen of the players that you have all given great accounts of, throughout the years, I really think that some of them can be given a chance next year. But, seeing the way they played in the U18 cup and also getting knocked out in Europe, I put it down to them following The City way to the letter of the law. This in itself is not a bad thing and I like the idea that the club follow this philosophy, rather that sending a youth team out to win at all costs. But at U18 U19 and EDS level, I think some of the naivety of the play I witnessed should be managed out of them, if we are likely to see them get their chance in the first team.
The truth is that our first team can't play the kind of football that our U13/14/15/16's can. In a few years time maybe it will, but I think this as much as anything else is what is limiting the first team game/squad time that very promising U18's and U19's may otherwise get and would most probably get at other clubs.
I don't think anyone can deny that ability of these guys but they are not being coached to fit into the current first team, they are being coached to fit into a City first team that doesn't exist yet. If you put some of these youngsters into our first team now, I would hazard a guess that they would be murdered, trying to play the way they have been coached.
Hopefully the likes of Denayer and Lopes or Cole/Iheanacho can start to find their way into the ranks next year. The sooner the better in my book. It will pave the way for younger more talented guys in the next few years.

[Ted Hughes]

If you think about it, the more they learn from their mistakes vs sides like Chelsea, the more they are likely to be able to cope with anything the first team ask them to do.

You are suggesting that if they learn to play the ball around under pressure, that it somehow makes it diffucult for them when they don't have to! Think about it . Of course they will find it easier if Hart doesn't even pass to them! They then don't have to worry about it.

As for them finding it difficult to adapt to the first team, of course they will. Why shouldn't they ? The best ones are only just 18 years old. If they found it easy, they would be better than Messi. It will be a huge step up. That's why they aren't playing.

But to put things into perspective; the team which struggled & beat Porto, dominated a Chelsea side containing most of the best of their youth cup team, & also Loftus Cheek & Nathan Ake & beat them a few months ago. Celina, who had a stinker,apparently ran rings round their u18s a few days ago as a younger side came back from 0-3 to draw 3-3.

Just because Chelsea won that tie, doesn't mean we have a problem.

[iwasthere2012]

If you think about it, the more they learn from their mistakes vs sides like Chelsea, the more they are likely to be able to cope with anything the first team ask them to do.

You are suggesting that if they learn to play the ball around under pressure, that it somehow makes it diffucult for them when they don't have to! Think about it . Of course they will find it easier if Hart doesn't even pass to them! They then don't have to worry about it.

As for them finding it difficult to adapt to the first team, of course they will. Why shouldn't they ? The best ones are only just 18 years old. If they found it easy, they would be better than Messi. It will be a huge step up. That's why they aren't playing.

But to put things into perspective; the team which struggled & beat Porto, dominated a Chelsea side containing most of the best of their youth cup team, & also Loftus Cheek & Nathan Ake & beat them a few months ago. Celina, who had a stinker,apparently ran rings round their u18s a few days ago as a younger side came back from 0-3 to draw 3-3.

Just because Chelsea won that tie, doesn't mean we have a problem.

it's hard for me to comment on the Porto game, as I am only going off the reports from Twosips, Yourself and Doug mainly and Wonderwall also. But I find it encouraging that although the consensus seems to be that we didn't play our game to the best of our ability, we did actually stick to our game and somehow found a way to win. I may be looking at it from the bright side but, that is progress and as you say yourself, it's no more than they deserve for the season they have had. You are probably correct in your suggestion that some of these kids are suffering physical and mental tiredness at this stage of what has been a long season for them. These are all positives in their development, I would agree.
I don't have a problem with us losing at this level in any competition, Ted. I don't see this as the be all and end all for their development. What you do want to compare them with is the best of what is around and certainly in England I would suggest that they and Chelsea are the best. You see these guys every other week. I don't. I'm no less interested in them progressing than you are though. I learn a lot from the reports on here but at the end of the day I can only really judge on what I witness myself.
You can tell me and probably have previously anyway, whether we are comparing like for like when we talk about the Chelsea team and I suspect we are not.
Our kids looked younger and still, particularly in the second game, I thought we outplayed them for most of the game. But they always looked like they were likely to score against us and most of that was down to the way we play. Maybe our players were under par from normal or maybe the opposition was better than we previously came up against. i know we beat them with only a slightly different team.
I keep defending my viewpoint by trying to make it clear that I don't think we have a problem, certainly not in the academy anyway. It may come across that way. I'm simply pointing out, as I think Wonderwall has also, that for the current crop of nearly there youth team players, I have observed as much skill and City team drilling as I have, perhaps 'naivety' is an unfair word, considering the age of these players.
It really depends for me on what happens this summer. If we stick with Pellegrini, I think we will perhaps have a bit of a clean out and hopefully get two or three upgrades in. If this is the case I think it is far more imperative that we have some promotion from within and I would love to see this. I just think from a youth management perspective then it would take a few tweaks with the current bunch to fast track some of them.
I don't disagree with what the club is doing at the academy and to be fair I don't disagree with any of your viewpoint either Ted. It's just a slightly different way of looking at the current situation at the club.
It could all be bollox of course, but it's an opinion.

[Ted Hughes]

The two best fastest strongest & most physical central attackers were both missing v Chelsea & Iheanacho has barely kicked a ball in a year but still caused them lots of problems. Ambrose played for the EDS v Chelsea & destroyed a mixture of the youth side defenders & the older, bigger more experienced defenders. Imo they cannot handle him.

Imo if he & Boadu had played we would have beaten them both legs.

[twosips]

What it boils down to me is that they view these games as education. It's that pure and simply. They don't care if they win or lose, and we all know that. That's why they insist on this philosophy regardless of the game, because they see this as STILL part of their education.

What the club asks of these lads is incredibly hard, no question about that, but they do it for a reason. If you ask someone to aim for a 10/10 then yes, they'll most likely not get a 10, but they could do really well, yet fall short and land on a 9, which is obviously still fantastic. If you ask them to aim for an 8, then they'll probably get that, but never go above it, and on a bad day fall to a 5. Aim high, and when you fail you're still better than most. This is what they're doing and this is why they insist that they persist with this style, regardless. Then one day chances are they'll get to the first team and it may turn out that they don't have to do this passing out from the back thing anywhere near as much, but they'll still absolutely piss it when they do get asked to do it and also be a lot better with teh ball at their feet than most cos of all this training drummed into them. It's all education.

If they start letting players have the easy way out now then bad habits will creep in. Most of these lads are still very, very young and they're still learning technically a hell of a lot and at this age the players a lot more impressionable than they will be in five/six years time and they know that, hence why they're drumming it in.... and if some of these players fail at what we're asking them to do, then we find a way to help them or they don't make it at City and we move them on. That's life. There will always now (with our new academy) be some incredibly eager kid ready to step up and do what the other couldn't. Game management can come when they're 20/21 and learning from the first team manager. They're teaching players to be incredibly good with the ball at their feet and work hard. Those skill are transferrable to any system thankfully... if they can do it too it shows they're intelligent footballers so they will be able to adapt to any environment potentially.

Most of the 'naivety' comes from the keeper passing it out. I guarantee you Hart would bever be doing that, and if he did do it to Maffeo or Angelino they'd be absolutely fine with it due to this training. And if Gunn was in between the sticks chances are he wouldn't get asked to do it anywhere near as much as he does for the EDS cos common sense kicks in and then you can play the situation a little more measured, but one things for sure is that he'd be a damn sight better than about 95% of his fellow keepers with the ball at his feet cos of this already.

[Wonderwall]

What it boils down to me is that they view these games as education. It's that pure and simply. They don't care if they win or lose, and we all know that. That's why they insist on this philosophy regardless of the game, because they see this as STILL part of their education.

What the club asks of these lads is incredibly hard, no question about that, but they do it for a reason. If you ask someone to aim for a 10/10 then yes, they'll most likely not get a 10, but they could do really well, yet fall short and land on a 9, which is obviously still fantastic. If you ask them to aim for an 8, then they'll probably get that, but never go above it, and on a bad day fall to a 5. Aim high, and when you fail you're still better than most. This is what they're doing and this is why they insist that they persist with this style, regardless. Then one day chances are they'll get to the first team and it may turn out that they don't have to do this passing out from the back thing anywhere near as much, but they'll still absolutely piss it when they do get asked to do it and also be a lot better with teh ball at their feet than most cos of all this training drummed into them. It's all education.

If they start letting players have the easy way out now then bad habits will creep in. Most of these lads are still very, very young and they're still learning technically a hell of a lot and at this age the players a lot more impressionable than they will be in five/six years time and they know that, hence why they're drumming it in.... and if some of these players fail at what we're asking them to do, then we find a way to help them or they don't make it at City and we move them on. That's life. There will always now (with our new academy) be some incredibly eager kid ready to step up and do what the other couldn't. Game management can come when they're 20/21 and learning from the first team manager. They're teaching players to be incredibly good with the ball at their feet and work hard. Those skill are transferrable to any system thankfully... if they can do it too it shows they're intelligent footballers so they will be able to adapt to any environment potentially.

Most of the 'naivety' comes from the keeper passing it out. I guarantee you Hart would bever be doing that, and if he did do it to Maffeo or Angelino they'd be absolutely fine with it due to this training. And if Gunn was in between the sticks chances are he wouldn't get asked to do it anywhere near as much as he does for the EDS cos common sense kicks in and then you can play the situation a little more measured, but one things for sure is that he'd be a damn sight better than about 95% of his fellow keepers with the ball at his feet cos of this already.

I totally understand that it is drilled into them and that it is the preferred way of playing at all times, but when do you start trusting the keeper to make their own decisions? This is also part of a learning process and one of the most crucial elements of football is the decision making, taking the right option at the right time, not just passing it because you are not allowed to make your own mind up.

I agree that we play this way and its a great learning curve and education, but what we were missing against Porto was the support from the centre midfielders. The gap was so big at one point it was two straight lines of 5, one on the edge of our area and the other on the half way line. This is the area IMO, that PV should have been addressing. If we are going to play it short then the movement needs to be much better to give Gunn options.

[iwasthere2012]

What it boils down to me is that they view these games as education. It's that pure and simply. They don't care if they win or lose, and we all know that. That's why they insist on this philosophy regardless of the game, because they see this as STILL part of their education.

What the club asks of these lads is incredibly hard, no question about that, but they do it for a reason. If you ask someone to aim for a 10/10 then yes, they'll most likely not get a 10, but they could do really well, yet fall short and land on a 9, which is obviously still fantastic. If you ask them to aim for an 8, then they'll probably get that, but never go above it, and on a bad day fall to a 5. Aim high, and when you fail you're still better than most. This is what they're doing and this is why they insist that they persist with this style, regardless. Then one day chances are they'll get to the first team and it may turn out that they don't have to do this passing out from the back thing anywhere near as much, but they'll still absolutely piss it when they do get asked to do it and also be a lot better with teh ball at their feet than most cos of all this training drummed into them. It's all education.

If they start letting players have the easy way out now then bad habits will creep in. Most of these lads are still very, very young and they're still learning technically a hell of a lot and at this age the players a lot more impressionable than they will be in five/six years time and they know that, hence why they're drumming it in.... and if some of these players fail at what we're asking them to do, then we find a way to help them or they don't make it at City and we move them on. That's life. There will always now (with our new academy) be some incredibly eager kid ready to step up and do what the other couldn't. Game management can come when they're 20/21 and learning from the first team manager. They're teaching players to be incredibly good with the ball at their feet and work hard. Those skill are transferrable to any system thankfully... if they can do it too it shows they're intelligent footballers so they will be able to adapt to any environment potentially.

Most of the 'naivety' comes from the keeper passing it out. I guarantee you Hart would bever be doing that, and if he did do it to Maffeo or Angelino they'd be absolutely fine with it due to this training. And if Gunn was in between the sticks chances are he wouldn't get asked to do it anywhere near as much as he does for the EDS cos common sense kicks in and then you can play the situation a little more measured, but one things for sure is that he'd be a damn sight better than about 95% of his fellow keepers with the ball at his feet cos of this already.

I appreciate all this Twosips and believe me, the very convincing arguments that both yourself and Ted have continually put forward are not wasted on me.
I go along with everything you've said and do believe it is the way to go and we will reap the benefits. I suppose some of my frustration has to do with my own impatience and the fact I'm dying to see one or two make the break through. I do believe once we start, it will be easier in the future for us to slot a talented youngster in to the first team squad.
In the mean time we are not the only club using the loan system to get that game management and experience for our 19-21 year olds. I think this makes the clubs we pick for them so important. I'm kind of living for the day when we can slot a couple of young talented kids into our squad to get that kind of experience with City instead of somewhere else. I suppose at that age, if you are truly talented, you will get the opportunity but I think it is less likely now than maybe in 5 years time. Hopefully by then we will be well and truly into the next phase of the clubs development and all the first team will be up to speed.

[mr_nool]

What it boils down to me is that they view these games as education. It's that pure and simply. They don't care if they win or lose, and we all know that. That's why they insist on this philosophy regardless of the game, because they see this as STILL part of their education.

What the club asks of these lads is incredibly hard, no question about that, but they do it for a reason. If you ask someone to aim for a 10/10 then yes, they'll most likely not get a 10, but they could do really well, yet fall short and land on a 9, which is obviously still fantastic. If you ask them to aim for an 8, then they'll probably get that, but never go above it, and on a bad day fall to a 5. Aim high, and when you fail you're still better than most. This is what they're doing and this is why they insist that they persist with this style, regardless. Then one day chances are they'll get to the first team and it may turn out that they don't have to do this passing out from the back thing anywhere near as much, but they'll still absolutely piss it when they do get asked to do it and also be a lot better with teh ball at their feet than most cos of all this training drummed into them. It's all education.

If they start letting players have the easy way out now then bad habits will creep in. Most of these lads are still very, very young and they're still learning technically a hell of a lot and at this age the players a lot more impressionable than they will be in five/six years time and they know that, hence why they're drumming it in.... and if some of these players fail at what we're asking them to do, then we find a way to help them or they don't make it at City and we move them on. That's life. There will always now (with our new academy) be some incredibly eager kid ready to step up and do what the other couldn't. Game management can come when they're 20/21 and learning from the first team manager. They're teaching players to be incredibly good with the ball at their feet and work hard. Those skill are transferrable to any system thankfully... if they can do it too it shows they're intelligent footballers so they will be able to adapt to any environment potentially.

Most of the 'naivety' comes from the keeper passing it out. I guarantee you Hart would bever be doing that, and if he did do it to Maffeo or Angelino they'd be absolutely fine with it due to this training. And if Gunn was in between the sticks chances are he wouldn't get asked to do it anywhere near as much as he does for the EDS cos common sense kicks in and then you can play the situation a little more measured, but one things for sure is that he'd be a damn sight better than about 95% of his fellow keepers with the ball at his feet cos of this already.

I totally understand that it is drilled into them and that it is the preferred way of playing at all times, but when do you start trusting the keeper to make their own decisions? This is also part of a learning process and one of the most crucial elements of football is the decision making, taking the right option at the right time, not just passing it because you are not allowed to make your own mind up.

I agree that we play this way and its a great learning curve and education, but what we were missing against Porto was the support from the centre midfielders. The gap was so big at one point it was two straight lines of 5, one on the edge of our area and the other on the half way line. This is the area IMO, that PV should have been addressing. If we are going to play it short then the movement needs to be much better to give Gunn options.

I agree with WW on this one. Football education is also about tactics and learning how to think football, and that's not an easy skill to master.

Once the game starts the manager has very little chance to influence it. If the opposition is set up differently than planned it's up to the players to act on it, so in my opinion the sooner they start learning to read a game the better.

[blues2win]

Nothing more depressing than seeing Hart boot the ball up towards Aguero. The responsibility for this is not just Hart's. Players have got to make themselves available for an early release of the ball so that he has options then Hart has to have the vision and technique to find them with hand or foot. It's a hugely important part of launching fast counter attacks which is such an important part of beating packed defences. Entirely agree about insisting on the Academy/ EDS being forced to learn this.

[Ted Hughes]

What it boils down to me is that they view these games as education. It's that pure and simply. They don't care if they win or lose, and we all know that. That's why they insist on this philosophy regardless of the game, because they see this as STILL part of their education.

What the club asks of these lads is incredibly hard, no question about that, but they do it for a reason. If you ask someone to aim for a 10/10 then yes, they'll most likely not get a 10, but they could do really well, yet fall short and land on a 9, which is obviously still fantastic. If you ask them to aim for an 8, then they'll probably get that, but never go above it, and on a bad day fall to a 5. Aim high, and when you fail you're still better than most. This is what they're doing and this is why they insist that they persist with this style, regardless. Then one day chances are they'll get to the first team and it may turn out that they don't have to do this passing out from the back thing anywhere near as much, but they'll still absolutely piss it when they do get asked to do it and also be a lot better with teh ball at their feet than most cos of all this training drummed into them. It's all education.

If they start letting players have the easy way out now then bad habits will creep in. Most of these lads are still very, very young and they're still learning technically a hell of a lot and at this age the players a lot more impressionable than they will be in five/six years time and they know that, hence why they're drumming it in.... and if some of these players fail at what we're asking them to do, then we find a way to help them or they don't make it at City and we move them on. That's life. There will always now (with our new academy) be some incredibly eager kid ready to step up and do what the other couldn't. Game management can come when they're 20/21 and learning from the first team manager. They're teaching players to be incredibly good with the ball at their feet and work hard. Those skill are transferrable to any system thankfully... if they can do it too it shows they're intelligent footballers so they will be able to adapt to any environment potentially.

Most of the 'naivety' comes from the keeper passing it out. I guarantee you Hart would bever be doing that, and if he did do it to Maffeo or Angelino they'd be absolutely fine with it due to this training. And if Gunn was in between the sticks chances are he wouldn't get asked to do it anywhere near as much as he does for the EDS cos common sense kicks in and then you can play the situation a little more measured, but one things for sure is that he'd be a damn sight better than about 95% of his fellow keepers with the ball at his feet cos of this already.

I totally understand that it is drilled into them and that it is the preferred way of playing at all times, but when do you start trusting the keeper to make their own decisions? This is also part of a learning process and one of the most crucial elements of football is the decision making, taking the right option at the right time, not just passing it because you are not allowed to make your own mind up.

I agree that we play this way and its a great learning curve and education, but what we were missing against Porto was the support from the centre midfielders. The gap was so big at one point it was two straight lines of 5, one on the edge of our area and the other on the half way line. This is the area IMO, that PV should have been addressing. If we are going to play it short then the movement needs to be much better to give Gunn options.

I agree with WW on this one. Football education is also about tactics and learning how to think football, and that's not an easy skill to master.

Once the game starts the manager has very little chance to influence it. If the opposition is set up differently than planned it's up to the players to act on it, so in my opinion the sooner they start learning to read a game the better.

Giving up on playing the ball out because it's difficult isn't 'reading the game' it's giving up & taking the easy way out. If they can't do it v Porto's B team, how the fuck will they get on vs Barcelona in the Champions League ? Answer; they won't, they' ll boot it back to Barca as soon as they get pressed & the cycle of shit English football continues.

You can hear the troglodytes on commentry 'oh it's very naive to expect to do this' etc 'I'm all for people learning to pass the ball out...but..' & how many of these cunts have ever succeeded in doing it ? How the fuck do they know how you learn it ? Did they ? And meanwhile, have City been unsuccessful doing it ? Are our kids' teams failling to win games regularly ? Are we competing in tournaments ? Were we in the final v Chelsea & the final v Porto ?

Just leave them to it ffs.

[Wonderwall]

What it boils down to me is that they view these games as education. It's that pure and simply. They don't care if they win or lose, and we all know that. That's why they insist on this philosophy regardless of the game, because they see this as STILL part of their education.

What the club asks of these lads is incredibly hard, no question about that, but they do it for a reason. If you ask someone to aim for a 10/10 then yes, they'll most likely not get a 10, but they could do really well, yet fall short and land on a 9, which is obviously still fantastic. If you ask them to aim for an 8, then they'll probably get that, but never go above it, and on a bad day fall to a 5. Aim high, and when you fail you're still better than most. This is what they're doing and this is why they insist that they persist with this style, regardless. Then one day chances are they'll get to the first team and it may turn out that they don't have to do this passing out from the back thing anywhere near as much, but they'll still absolutely piss it when they do get asked to do it and also be a lot better with teh ball at their feet than most cos of all this training drummed into them. It's all education.

If they start letting players have the easy way out now then bad habits will creep in. Most of these lads are still very, very young and they're still learning technically a hell of a lot and at this age the players a lot more impressionable than they will be in five/six years time and they know that, hence why they're drumming it in.... and if some of these players fail at what we're asking them to do, then we find a way to help them or they don't make it at City and we move them on. That's life. There will always now (with our new academy) be some incredibly eager kid ready to step up and do what the other couldn't. Game management can come when they're 20/21 and learning from the first team manager. They're teaching players to be incredibly good with the ball at their feet and work hard. Those skill are transferrable to any system thankfully... if they can do it too it shows they're intelligent footballers so they will be able to adapt to any environment potentially.

Most of the 'naivety' comes from the keeper passing it out. I guarantee you Hart would bever be doing that, and if he did do it to Maffeo or Angelino they'd be absolutely fine with it due to this training. And if Gunn was in between the sticks chances are he wouldn't get asked to do it anywhere near as much as he does for the EDS cos common sense kicks in and then you can play the situation a little more measured, but one things for sure is that he'd be a damn sight better than about 95% of his fellow keepers with the ball at his feet cos of this already.

I totally understand that it is drilled into them and that it is the preferred way of playing at all times, but when do you start trusting the keeper to make their own decisions? This is also part of a learning process and one of the most crucial elements of football is the decision making, taking the right option at the right time, not just passing it because you are not allowed to make your own mind up.

I agree that we play this way and its a great learning curve and education, but what we were missing against Porto was the support from the centre midfielders. The gap was so big at one point it was two straight lines of 5, one on the edge of our area and the other on the half way line. This is the area IMO, that PV should have been addressing. If we are going to play it short then the movement needs to be much better to give Gunn options.

I agree with WW on this one. Football education is also about tactics and learning how to think football, and that's not an easy skill to master.

Once the game starts the manager has very little chance to influence it. If the opposition is set up differently than planned it's up to the players to act on it, so in my opinion the sooner they start learning to read a game the better.

Giving up on playing the ball out because it's difficult isn't 'reading the game' it's giving up & taking the easy way out. If they can't do it v Porto's B team, how the fuck will they get on vs Barcelona in the Champions League ? Answer; they won't, they' ll boot it back to Barca as soon as they get pressed & the cycle of shit English football continues.

You can hear the troglodytes on commentry 'oh it's very naive to expect to do this' etc 'I'm all for people learning to pass the ball out...but..' & how many of these cunts have ever succeeded in doing it ? How the fuck do they know how you learn it ? Did they ? And meanwhile, have City been unsuccessful doing it ? Are our kids' teams failling to win games regularly ? Are we competing in tournaments ? Were we in the final v Chelsea & the final v Porto ?

Just leave them to it ffs.

so there is no out ball but a very risky option to full back who is marked and a striker is closing the keeper fast. You want them to take a risk and if it means losing a goal because if it, its educational!! Bollox, they pass out from the back if an outball is on, not if its a big risk.

[kinkylola]

we're not creating little robots that have a perfect understanding and execution ... but at a young age, if you give them the easy way out, a large majority will take it.

Instead, if you train them to always looks for the short pass, even if it's dangerous, they will learn to take that as the first option and they will improve at it. Booting it is always a choice, it's the easiest choice and least effective at maintaining possession. A truly skilled player will be able to recognize the options in front of him, but if he hasn't been forced to try the harder option, he won't take it when under pressure with the game on the line ... and that will make a difference at the highest level.

It's like forcing a player to use his left foot in training ... these players are being prepared to be professionals ... not to win youth trophies.

[twosips]

What it boils down to me is that they view these games as education. It's that pure and simply. They don't care if they win or lose, and we all know that. That's why they insist on this philosophy regardless of the game, because they see this as STILL part of their education.

What the club asks of these lads is incredibly hard, no question about that, but they do it for a reason. If you ask someone to aim for a 10/10 then yes, they'll most likely not get a 10, but they could do really well, yet fall short and land on a 9, which is obviously still fantastic. If you ask them to aim for an 8, then they'll probably get that, but never go above it, and on a bad day fall to a 5. Aim high, and when you fail you're still better than most. This is what they're doing and this is why they insist that they persist with this style, regardless. Then one day chances are they'll get to the first team and it may turn out that they don't have to do this passing out from the back thing anywhere near as much, but they'll still absolutely piss it when they do get asked to do it and also be a lot better with teh ball at their feet than most cos of all this training drummed into them. It's all education.

If they start letting players have the easy way out now then bad habits will creep in. Most of these lads are still very, very young and they're still learning technically a hell of a lot and at this age the players a lot more impressionable than they will be in five/six years time and they know that, hence why they're drumming it in.... and if some of these players fail at what we're asking them to do, then we find a way to help them or they don't make it at City and we move them on. That's life. There will always now (with our new academy) be some incredibly eager kid ready to step up and do what the other couldn't. Game management can come when they're 20/21 and learning from the first team manager. They're teaching players to be incredibly good with the ball at their feet and work hard. Those skill are transferrable to any system thankfully... if they can do it too it shows they're intelligent footballers so they will be able to adapt to any environment potentially.

Most of the 'naivety' comes from the keeper passing it out. I guarantee you Hart would bever be doing that, and if he did do it to Maffeo or Angelino they'd be absolutely fine with it due to this training. And if Gunn was in between the sticks chances are he wouldn't get asked to do it anywhere near as much as he does for the EDS cos common sense kicks in and then you can play the situation a little more measured, but one things for sure is that he'd be a damn sight better than about 95% of his fellow keepers with the ball at his feet cos of this already.

I totally understand that it is drilled into them and that it is the preferred way of playing at all times, but when do you start trusting the keeper to make their own decisions? This is also part of a learning process and one of the most crucial elements of football is the decision making, taking the right option at the right time, not just passing it because you are not allowed to make your own mind up.

I agree that we play this way and its a great learning curve and education, but what we were missing against Porto was the support from the centre midfielders. The gap was so big at one point it was two straight lines of 5, one on the edge of our area and the other on the half way line. This is the area IMO, that PV should have been addressing. If we are going to play it short then the movement needs to be much better to give Gunn options.

I agree with WW on this one. Football education is also about tactics and learning how to think football, and that's not an easy skill to master.

Once the game starts the manager has very little chance to influence it. If the opposition is set up differently than planned it's up to the players to act on it, so in my opinion the sooner they start learning to read a game the better.

Giving up on playing the ball out because it's difficult isn't 'reading the game' it's giving up & taking the easy way out. If they can't do it v Porto's B team, how the fuck will they get on vs Barcelona in the Champions League ? Answer; they won't, they' ll boot it back to Barca as soon as they get pressed & the cycle of shit English football continues.

You can hear the troglodytes on commentry 'oh it's very naive to expect to do this' etc 'I'm all for people learning to pass the ball out...but..' & how many of these cunts have ever succeeded in doing it ? How the fuck do they know how you learn it ? Did they ? And meanwhile, have City been unsuccessful doing it ? Are our kids' teams failling to win games regularly ? Are we competing in tournaments ? Were we in the final v Chelsea & the final v Porto ?

Just leave them to it ffs.

so there is no out ball but a very risky option to full back who is marked and a striker is closing the keeper fast. You want them to take a risk and if it means losing a goal because if it, its educational!! Bollox, they pass out from the back if an outball is on, not if its a big risk.

I think we have a strong difference in opinion that isn't gonna meet a middle ground cos my answer is 'yes, i want them to try it, even if we risk conceding a goal' cos were trying to build incredibly confident comfortable players. The learning comes before the result. As Ted said if we don't learn it now when do we learn it? What do we do as soon as we play a good team who press high and do it well? Just play it long and constantly lose the ball? So we lose our whole style of play cos we're not confident in our abilities to pass it out. Barca's kids are cos they'll do a very similar thing. Why can't ours to?

[iwasthere2012]

we're not creating little robots that have a perfect understanding and execution ... but at a young age, if you give them the easy way out, a large majority will take it.

Instead, if you train them to always looks for the short pass, even if it's dangerous, they will learn to take that as the first option and they will improve at it. Booting it is always a choice, it's the easiest choice and least effective at maintaining possession. A truly skilled player will be able to recognize the options in front of him, but if he hasn't been forced to try the harder option, he won't take it when under pressure with the game on the line ... and that will make a difference at the highest level.

It's like forcing a player to use his left foot in training ... these players are being prepared to be professionals ... not to win youth trophies.

I could be reading this wrong, but I don't think anyone is disputing that what you are saying above is correct and I personally admire the fact that we have this policy. However the biggest difference I saw between Chelsea youth and us was exactly what Wonderwall and MrNool are talking about. It certainly wasn't the skill levels. As Ted has pointed out, we were missy players that would have made a big difference and we sent out younger players that have been coached to play things the way they did.
I really like the idea that we stick to our principles no matter whether it's a final or not, but we didn't have a team that could win it against a big more physical team that were coached to win the game, playing our game.
This is not a criticism of our youngsters that played or our policy. I would look at it this way. We will most likely play the same kinds of teams next year and the year after and we will field the same mixture of players playing above their age groups and those that were there the previous year.
As Ted has said, our younger age groups are ripping it up. Sooner or later we will win these U18 U19 EDS trophies playing exactly how we coached them through the age groups against bigger stronger opposition.
Then we will know we have something special.
In the meantime I still want to see some of the present crop get a chance in the first team starting with bringing back the few that have been mentioned, that are out on loan.

[twosips]

we're not creating little robots that have a perfect understanding and execution ... but at a young age, if you give them the easy way out, a large majority will take it.

Instead, if you train them to always looks for the short pass, even if it's dangerous, they will learn to take that as the first option and they will improve at it. Booting it is always a choice, it's the easiest choice and least effective at maintaining possession. A truly skilled player will be able to recognize the options in front of him, but if he hasn't been forced to try the harder option, he won't take it when under pressure with the game on the line ... and that will make a difference at the highest level.

It's like forcing a player to use his left foot in training ... these players are being prepared to be professionals ... not to win youth trophies.

Yep. And you know what if they actively said in games that they wanted our fullbacks to cut inside and pass it with their weaker feet to get comfortable doing that in a match environment, then so be it. I'd be fine with that. Yeah we may give the ball away sometimes but it's the bigger picture.

As it is our academy as a whole is currently very very successful across a number of levels and this is because, for once, they're being trained right whereas in recent years they weren't. We must be doing something right.

[kinkylola]

we're not creating little robots that have a perfect understanding and execution ... but at a young age, if you give them the easy way out, a large majority will take it.

Instead, if you train them to always looks for the short pass, even if it's dangerous, they will learn to take that as the first option and they will improve at it. Booting it is always a choice, it's the easiest choice and least effective at maintaining possession. A truly skilled player will be able to recognize the options in front of him, but if he hasn't been forced to try the harder option, he won't take it when under pressure with the game on the line ... and that will make a difference at the highest level.

It's like forcing a player to use his left foot in training ... these players are being prepared to be professionals ... not to win youth trophies.

I could be reading this wrong, but I don't think anyone is disputing that what you are saying above is correct and I personally admire the fact that we have this policy. However the biggest difference I saw between Chelsea youth and us was exactly what Wonderwall and MrNool are talking about. It certainly wasn't the skill levels. As Ted has pointed out, we were missy players that would have made a big difference and we sent out younger players that have been coached to play things the way they did.
I really like the idea that we stick to our principles no matter whether it's a final or not, but we didn't have a team that could win it against a big more physical team that were coached to win the game, playing our game.
This is not a criticism of our youngsters that played or our policy. I would look at it this way. We will most likely play the same kinds of teams next year and the year after and we will field the same mixture of players playing above their age groups and those that were there the previous year.
As Ted has said, our younger age groups are ripping it up. Sooner or later we will win these U18 U19 EDS trophies playing exactly how we coached them through the age groups against bigger stronger opposition.
Then we will know we have something special.
In the meantime I still want to see some of the present crop get a chance in the first team starting with bringing back the few that have been mentioned, that are out on loan.

this was mainly in response to the discussion about a goalie kicking it long or taking a chance on a short pass to a player under pressure. I expanded it to fit the whole team.