'Young side' - RUBBISH

[yellowrider120 917]

o

[lappinitup 629]

Just now, yellowrider120 said:

o

Good post.

[Chelm Canary 404]

1 minute ago, yellowrider120 said:

o

My

[yellowrider120 917]

One of the long standing myths perpetuated by Farke, Webber, the owners and even the gullible local media is that City are 'such a young team'. It is straightforward garbage yet no fan seems to pick this up and query it.

Take the starting line up on Saturday. FIVE players were age 30 or over and the average age was just short of 27 and a half. 'Young side', do me a favour. Not one single teenager in the starting line up. 'Inexperienced at PL level' yes but 'young' most definitely not.  Those who perpetuate this myth do so purely as an excuse for this seasons embarrassing shambles. Expect to here more of this truck over the next few days from those in power.

[Bill 1,788]

3 minutes ago, yellowrider120 said:

One of the long standing myths perpetuated by Farke, Webber, the owners and even the gullible local media is that City are 'such a young team'. It is straightforward garbage yet no fan seems to pick this up and query it.

Take the starting line up on Saturday. FIVE players were age 30 or over and the average age was just short of 27 and a half. 'Young side', do me a favour. Not one single teenager in the starting line up. 'Inexperienced at PL level' yes but 'young' most definitely not.  Those who perpetuate this myth do so purely as an excuse for this seasons embarrassing shambles. Expect to here more of this shy te over the next few days from this numpty

Fixed it for the rest of us

Edited July 12, 2020 by Bill

[Terminally Yellow 2,614]

20 minutes ago, yellowrider120 said:

o

Still better than some of the posts we get on here.

[keelansgrandad 6,680]

If he says "o" again I will report him.😎

[Number9 272]

(R)

[JF 694]

In fairness this post is correct, An average age of 27 isn’t a young side. The problem we have is that 3 of the youngest and most inexperienced players in the team are all playing in the back 4 

[hogesar 10,761]

We've also played much younger average age sides this season, just because it wasnt yesterday..

[yellowrider120 917]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

We've also played much younger average age sides this season, just because it wasnt yesterday..

When?

Sure Cantwell would normally have started but that's it as far as so called 'youngsters' are concerned. Others who might have played are Hanley (28), Zimbo (27), Rupp (29), Drmic (27). Again - doesn't support this notion of .............'City have so many youngsters in the team', 'the youngsters are all still learning' etc. Three of the back four are 'young', rest of the squad is (pretty much) late 20's, early 30's yet that fact doesn't support the myth does it? If Idah, Josh Martin and the likes of the ones we have just signed can all be part of the first team next season (if good enough of course) then the average age may (at best) stabilise at current level in view of the fact that our current first team youngsters are most likely set to leave!!  

[Terminally Yellow 2,614]

3 hours ago, yellowrider120 said:

One of the long standing myths perpetuated by Farke, Webber, the owners and even the gullible local media is that City are 'such a young team'. It is straightforward garbage yet no fan seems to pick this up and query it.

Take the starting line up on Saturday. FIVE players were age 30 or over and the average age was just short of 27 and a half. 'Young side', do me a favour. Not one single teenager in the starting line up. 'Inexperienced at PL level' yes but 'young' most definitely not.  Those who perpetuate this myth do so purely as an excuse for this seasons embarrassing shambles. Expect to here more of this truck over the next few days from those in power.

Fair point. We are not a young side. 

[hogesar 10,761]

2 minutes ago, yellowrider120 said:

When?

Sure Cantwell would normally have started but that's it as far as so called 'youngsters' are concerned. Others who might have played are Hanley (28), Zimbo (27), Rupp (29), Drmic (27). Again - doesn't support this notion of .............'City have so many youngsters in the team', 'the youngsters are all still learning' etc. Three of the back four are 'young', rest of the squad is (pretty much) late 20's, early 30's yet that fact doesn't support the myth does it? If Idah, Josh Martin and the likes of the ones we have just signed can all be part of the first team next season (if good enough of course) then the average age may (at best) stabilise at current level in view of the fact that our current first team youngsters are most likely set to leave!!  

3rd average youngest starting lineup in the prem this season

[hogesar 10,761]

15 minutes ago, Terminally Yellow said:

Fair point. We are not a young side. 

We are though. The third youngest in the league and only just been promoted so equally the least experienced. 

[Terminally Yellow 2,614]

1 minute ago, hogesar said:

We are though. The third youngest in the league and only just been promoted so equally the least experienced. 

Yes because we play four very young players that greatly reduces any average. The point made is about the team as a whole. 

[hogesar 10,761]

1 minute ago, Terminally Yellow said:

Yes because we play four very young players that greatly reduces any average. The point made is about the team as a whole. 

So what's your point? No one has said "our entire starting eleven are all young players"

[Terminally Yellow 2,614]

3 minutes ago, hogesar said:

So what's your point? No one has said "our entire starting eleven are all young players"

I’m not making any point, I’m agreeing with the original poster and you tried to peddle some absolute **** on me in response. 

[hogesar 10,761]

Just now, Terminally Yellow said:

I’m not making any point, I’m agreeing with the original poster and you tried to peddle some absolute **** on me in response. 

What, like a fact?

[Terminally Yellow 2,614]

1 minute ago, hogesar said:

What, like a fact?

No a statistic that proves you missed the point by a mile. 

[Canary Wundaboy 1,423]

11 minutes ago, hogesar said:

We are though. The third youngest in the league and only just been promoted so equally the least experienced. 

So they needed some experienced heads brought in to help them...which we can never afford.

[hogesar 10,761]

5 minutes ago, Terminally Yellow said:

No a statistic that proves you missed the point by a mile. 

Hmm...the OP used one fixture to dismiss the fact we are a young side.

Saying "yeah but only some of our players are young therefore it doesnt count" is nonsense. The averages I posted is across the board, same rules apply to all teams.

Comparatively we have had one of the youngest starting elevens in the league. It's a fact.

[hogesar 10,761]

5 minutes ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

So they needed some experienced heads brought in to help them...which we can never afford.

Yep. Could have done with more than just Tettey and Krul. Maybe a fully fit Klose all season would have helped, who knows. 

[Terminally Yellow 2,614]

10 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Hmm...the OP used one fixture to dismiss the fact we are a young side.

Saying "yeah but only some of our players are young therefore it doesnt count" is nonsense. The averages I posted is across the board, same rules apply to all teams.

Comparatively we have had one of the youngest starting elevens in the league. It's a fact.

Having young players in your side (which is what an average shows) is very different to having a young team. Which is the point made.

[Aggy 944]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

3rd average youngest starting lineup in the prem this season

That article is from September after only a few games. Link here:

https://www.premierleague.com/news/1336761

 In a similar article done during the lockdown in May, we had the seventh youngest squad. Link here:

https://www.football365.com/news/ranking-average-age-premier-league-starting-xis

So it is still a young side, but not quite as young as some make out.

[hogesar 10,761]

So just to clarify, contrary to this weird attempt to attack Farke and Webber in the original post, turns out, comparatively speaking, yes, we were a young side last season:

https://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/canaries-premier-league-top-dogs-academy-minutes-played-1-6783447

Not that the above should have been needed to evidence that.

[Midlands Yellow 4,682]

On 12/07/2020 at 20:32, hogesar said:

We are though. The third youngest in the league and only just been promoted so equally the least experienced. 

Just promoted or just relegated? 

[Jerrykerry 223]

On 12/07/2020 at 16:37, yellowrider120 said:

One of the long standing myths perpetuated by Farke, Webber, the owners and even the gullible local media is that City are 'such a young team'. It is straightforward garbage yet no fan seems to pick this up and query it.

Take the starting line up on Saturday. FIVE players were age 30 or over and the average age was just short of 27 and a half. 'Young side', do me a favour. Not one single teenager in the starting line up. 'Inexperienced at PL level' yes but 'young' most definitely not.  Those who perpetuate this myth do so purely as an excuse for this seasons embarrassing shambles. Expect to here more of this truck over the next few days from those in power.

I've picked up on it, as have many others. 

 

It was a poor excuse all last season and completely untrue. 

[TheGunnShow 7,376]

On 12/07/2020 at 16:37, yellowrider120 said:

One of the long standing myths perpetuated by Farke, Webber, the owners and even the gullible local media is that City are 'such a young team'. It is straightforward garbage yet no fan seems to pick this up and query it.

Take the starting line up on Saturday. FIVE players were age 30 or over and the average age was just short of 27 and a half. 'Young side', do me a favour. Not one single teenager in the starting line up. 'Inexperienced at PL level' yes but 'young' most definitely not.  Those who perpetuate this myth do so purely as an excuse for this seasons embarrassing shambles. Expect to here more of this truck over the next few days from those in power.

The bit in bold actually weakens the argument somewhat as inexperience at that rarefied level can basically lead to its own brand of naivety, although the basic numbers don't lie. There wasn't a lot of top-flight experience (and the loanees who had it didn't do well either, none of Fährmann, Amadou, or Duda did much during the season). Even some of our older players didn't have much top-flight experience in their native countries either, let alone in England. Zimmermann and Stiepermann were two obvious members of that club. Obviously, none of our youngsters had any Premiership whatsoever until this season as well, and as other stats showed, we gave ex-academy players more minutes than any other Premiership team.

I think it's understandable that we're a bit hurt and angry after a streak we've been on, but as ever when it comes to statistics - they're like miniskirts. What they show is revealing. What they hide is vital. And I think top-flight experience trumps age here.

[Yorkshire Canary 118]

The old saying goes you do not win anything with Kids. It is all about the blend and balance. We play four or 5 young players on a regular basis which is good, they need to be supported by more street wise older players who can help the youngsters. Youngsters have potential but as part of their development they will make mistakes. We would be in a muddle if our average age was about 22

[First Wazzock 1,010]

I think E would be my choice if it was a 'Post a single vowel of your choosing' type thread

Edited August 8, 2020 by First Wazzock