Martin - is the academy as a waiste of time?

[Herbert 0]

we seem to produce so few good players through the academy and as soon as we do the chances are that a big club will come in and buy them for pittance. This annoys the hell out of me, and makes me wonder why we bother if these large clubs are allowed to swoop for young talent and then never play themthe FA should stop this from happening- another part of the sick game..

[Carlos Valderrama 0]

The reason that the academy has stopped producing talent is down to the 90 minute travelling rule.  If you set out from norwich 90 minutes would possibly get you as far as cambridge, ipswich, kings lynn.

Basically what this means is that the club does not have the catchment area to choose from, and as a result the academy is suffering.  If you look at ipswich for example 90 minutes takes them into central london.

We will unearth talent locally, unfortunately it will be few and far between.

For once we cant blame the club for this.

[Alex Harvey-Jones 0]

I don''t think it''s a waste of time. Even if you only get one good youngster coming through each year, it''s better than nothing. Smaller clubs are going to have to rely increasingly on home grown youngsters that they can sell to make ends meet. Sad but true fact of modern football. We haven''t had many young players coming through in the past few years but I believe the academy set up is now beginning to pay dividends. Martin is a great example of that!

[Hump 0]

I don''t know what car you drive but 90 minutes gets you alittle further than Cambridge which with the new road improvemnets is under the hour, another 30 mins gives you a very large area

[Carlos Valderrama 0]

90 minutes gets you from Norwich to Cambridge.  Cambridge is 65-70 miles away, yes you can get there in an hour but these things are worked out scientifically taking into account speed limits, traffic and distance.  They are not worked out by some bloke from the FA setting off from Carrow Road in his Mondeo.

Why can''t people reply with a little common sense. 

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,435]

The point that Jimmy makes is a very good one. Regardless of what car you drive , the 90 minutes rule (in fact it is a 60 minutes rule for the younger players) does impinge on who you can invite in.

What does seem to hapen though is that clubs set up "centres" where players can train out of area and this does seem to be the solution. However the Club does seem a bit slow on the uptake here, and there are very few centres outside of Norfolk. Here in West Suffolk, decent young players have no alternatives to ITFC or Cambridge unless they want to bang up the A11 for an hour.

I know there are strict FA rules about this, but there should be a way for NCFC to have representation in Suffolk, and Essex.

 

[Syteanric 1]

Manchester utd get round this (or have done in the past) by flying youngsters to the club... the Country is our Oyster... also, we are well placed for France, holland and Scandinavia if u take into account flying for 90 minutes. We should exploit this loop hole

jas :)

[Carlos Valderrama 0]

Flying is in fact not an option as you have to factor in waiting time at airports.  How many flights have you taken where you walk into the airport and get straight on the plane.  None, the country is not our oyster, it is no ones oyster.  The rule was set up to help lower league clubs secure the best talent within their catchment areas, ensuring that the big boys do not cherry pick all the talented youngsters.

We can argue this until we are blue in the face.  There are no loopholes to exploit.

The only way around this is to relocate entire families at great expense, unfortunately this is only available for the richest of clubs and for the most exceptional talent.  I also believe that out of town training centres are out of the equation too as these would also be very costly. 

[djc 0]

Fly in youngsters to Norwich?

That would make good sense because of our excellent local airport facilities, and perhaps we could even make use of a low-cost cheap budget airline sponser. Oh, if only we could find on of them ......

[Syteanric 1]

you may be right Jimmy.. but did Man utd get away with it because they are "manchester utd" and have their own rules? or did they find a looph ole?

jas :)

[Yellowfuture 71]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]

Manchester utd get round this (or have done in the past) by flying youngsters to the club... the Country is our Oyster... also, we are well placed for France, holland and Scandinavia if u take into account flying for 90 minutes. We should exploit this loop hole

jas :)

[/quote]

We quite often get boys in from Denmark and Ireland and even one from Canada in the younger age groups. The club arranges accomodation locally for the boys and they stay there when having a trial or training.

[Hump 0]

Jimmy ,the time is based on actual travelling time within reason and waiting and traffic jams are irrelevant. If you find a player outside the scope of travelling just give the FA a plausible alternative address.Man United was based on travelling time that is how long in the air.

PS.

It was a sensible reply baased on fact

 

[Carlos Valderrama 0]

No, the travelling time is based on when the youngster leaves his front door to when he arrives at his destination.  Traffic, speed limits and other situations are factored into this - FACT.

This is to protect the younger talent who still have other things to do like go to school and get an education.  Yes we can give an alternative plausible address but this must involve a parent or guardian, you can''t just shove a 15 year old kid into digs.

I do however concede that after the age of 17 things are slightly different because then temporary accomodation can play a part.

[norfolkchance1 0]

Isn''t there some clubs who get around the rule by using helicopters for the 90 minute journey as there is nothing to suggest what mode of transport the 90 minutes have to be travelled in.

[Carlos Valderrama 0]

You still have to factor in the youngsters travelling time to the heliport.  Plus this would be a tad expensive.

My suggestion is that we speak to the BBC and see if they will lend us their Tardis.

The 90 minute rule is set in stone, there are no loop holes.  NONE.  Each club has a catchment area to cherry pick from, unfortunately ours is full of villages and small towns.  Also I think that because East Anglia is a fairly affluent area there are no ''Street Kids'' who spend every spare hour kicking a ball in the streets.  All the best talent historically has come from lesser back grounds, Liverpool, Manchester, Central London, Birmingham where quality of life is not as nice as that in our region.

Think back over the years and how much talent has actually been local.....

Danny Mills, Ruel Fox, Dale Gordon - All Local

Craig Bellamy - Wales, Robert Green - Chertsey, Ade Akinbiyi - London, Chris Llewellyn - Wales, Darren Eadie, Jamie Cureton, Jason Shackell - None from this region.

We will find talent (Chris Martin) but it will be rare.

[Christov 3]

Its not just the fact that that we''re full of small villages, you travel 90 minutes north -> south east and you end up in the sea!  How do Arsenal get around this, their whole youth team is anything but english?

[Hump 0]

Jimmy

You are wrong in many of your assumptions about the rule.I don''t know where you got the information from but trust me I know 100%   what is involved and unless you have the same experience I beg to disagree.

[Carlos Valderrama 0]

Hump, common sense tells me I am not wrong about my ASSUMPTIONS.  Explain to me this, what is the point in having a 90 minute travelling rule for youngsters if..........

Driving - In normal circumstances they are going to spend 90 minutes travelling + 30 minutes to 1 hour in traffic = 2 - 2.5 hours

Flying - 60 minute flight, lets assume 30 minutes to the airport = 90 minutes + 2 hours (minimum check in) = 3.5 hours NOT  90 minutes......

Also I do not claim to know 100% what is involved, I am merely stating what I know to be fact.  Anything over and above I am happy to state that I do not know.  Seeing as you are the oracle of knowledge regarding this please explain to me what the score is, and justify exactly how and why you know all.

90 minutes travelling time - 90 minutes total - not 120 minutes, not 300 minutes - 90 minutes maximum.  FACT.

. 

[Syteanric 1]

Jimmy, 3 things.

1. How come Manchester united Poached a young lad from ourselves about 5 years ago and flew him up to Manchester longer than 90 minutes?

2. for a domestic flight u only need to check in 30 minutes before, not 2 hours. take into account the actual flight, and the drive to carrow road/Colney this could be done easily!

3. if thats the case for 90 minutes covering everything, how do u explain Asmat el Ougari and Michael Spillane?

jas :)

[Hump 0]

Dear Jimmy

Thank you for your kind words-from today I am the Oracle. For me to divulge my identity and justify my statements would reveal who I am ,so just trust me on this one.Any club can bend any rule to get around any loophole.

 

 

2.3. Clubs must adhere to a one hour travelling time to the Centre for ages

Under 9 years to Under 13. For age ranges Under 13 to Under 16, this is

increased to 1.5 hours.

[Carlos Valderrama 0]

1.   The 90 minute rule has not been in force for that long.  It is a recent thing to prevent young children from travelling extreme distances and thus suffering with schoolwork etc.  Also, as I have recently stated, if the talent is good enough then clubs like Manchester can re-locate families, even provide jobs for parents.

2.   It is 2 hours for most flights regardless of destination.  I regularly fly to Aberdeen from Norwich and I have to check in 1 hour before the flight, this is with eastern airways, the rules are different for say Easyjet.  Regardless of whether the flight is internal or not the check in period is to allow the airline to calculate weight, weight positioning, fuel, baggage in order to calculate take off speed etc.

3.   I can''t explain Michael Spillane or Asmat el Ougari for sure but i think.....El Ourgari was 16 (different rules) and Spillane''s family is in norfolk.

We have a youngster called Kris Renton from Scotland, again he was over 16.

My point is the 90 minute rule has been set up for younger players who still have schooling commitments and to help the distribution of wealth and talent accross the lower leagues.

To back up my point, why are there no talented youngsters coming through from outside the area, Jarvis brothers - Attleborough, Henderson - Thetford, Martin - Beccles, the same is true for all of the players who are under 16 and most of the 17-18 year olds.  Go back a few years and we had youngsters from all over the country.  I bet if you look at the squads from other clubs all the under 16 players are local boys.

[Carlos Valderrama 0]

Hump/Oracle

TRAVELLING TIME - To get from point A to point B, regardless and irrespective of whether or not you are actually moving.  As I stated before traffic and other things are factored in.  And yes I have also read the FA rule book.  And you can''t bend rules when it comes to minors.  I agree that the rules could probably be bent for players aged 16 and over but not under.  Also if you read further into the rules it states, with regards to satellite academys that due consideration is given to clubs where travelling time is a potential issue.  (they i.e London, I would assume this is because of TRAFFIC restrictions).

Also, your statement about not revealing who you are is hilarious.  Secret Agent Hump, FA rule book writer and part time secret agent.  Let me guess, you could tell us who you are but then you would have to kill us.  Me personally, I don''t care who you are, do you work for the FA, are you employed by the club, do you work in Football, that is all I am interested in.

I am, as you state prepared to trust you on this because I am not the oracle of knowledge.  I do however believe everything I have said to be true, and because I am sad loser with nothing better to do all day I have sent the FA an email asking them to clarify the position on this.  I don''t like to lose any debate, but, if I am wrong I will happily hold my hand up and say ''Yes, I was wrong, I am an argumentative berk''.

[Syteanric 1]

Andy cave-Brown joined the club under 16 and hes from Scotland...

 i think Hump is right here.. i can remember reading this somewhere. perhaps on the FA website? seems familiar now.

jas :)

[Hump 0]

Check out the Academy scholars  on Foncy website and see where they come from.

Spillane lives in Cambridge.

[Fluff 0]

Jimmy,

I would like to step in now if I may.  Having spent 5 years freezing my nads off on a sunday morning or getting sun burnt during numerous youth football tournaments for the academy and the ESFA as a talent scount, the 90 minute rule is not the issue but an excuse when it comes to the powers that be, and it has been in force for a long time, 10 years in fact!  Ipswich seem to not have any issues with youngsters, and that has nothing to do with the proximity to London either as they have to contend with the north London clubs.  It has everything to do with the way that talent is coached, nurtured and treated.  Many good players have come through the academy and gone on to do well elsewhere, albeit at a lower level, but the same can be said for kids being released from Liverpool, Arsenal and other ''higher'' clubs.  The truth is, the academy system as a whole isnt working.  The 90 minute rule is travelling time, not checking in time, sitting in traffic time or anything else.  Given how poor our road network system is, it can sometimes take 90 minutes to get to Beccles, so given your explaination Martin should never have been in the academy! 

90 minutes does not work, but then neither does the Academy system which is why Wenger, Ferguson and many other top coaches are now asking the FA to revisit the original concept and look again. A bigger issue is the win at all costs football that kids are playing at an early age with the competative dads and shouty coaches!

[Alex Harvey-Jones 0]

[quote user="Hump"]

Spillane lives in Cambridge.

[/quote] He was born in St Hellier though - I guess that must be the one in Jersey...as in the capital of!!

[Carlos Valderrama 0]

Thanks for clearing that up flufty.  So to summarise (and hopefully understand better) the 90 minutes is travelling only, does that mean that realistic distances are calculated and the club issued a specific catchment area? Or is anyone from anywhere fair game?

I agree that it can take up to 90 minutes to get to beccles sometimes, sometimes it can take that to get from one side of the city to the other!!!!  The point I was trying to make was ''realistic travelling time'' in response to the berk who stated that you could get from norwich to cambridge in under the hour.  I disagree with you with regard to flying, surely, a 2 hour check in period would count in the 90 minutes.  I have read numerous documents and web pages regarding this since this little debate started (a bit of one upmanship and ammo hunting) and I must say that the rules and guidelines are wooly to say the least.  The whole format seems to be a little bit on the fence with no definitive you cannot do this and you can do that (from what I have seen thus far).  So yes, there are loopholes, big huge gaping loopholes to exploit.

Also, your final comment....What is not working, the 90 minute rule? the academy system in general? or both........

I actually find this subject quite interesting, plus I am always willing to learn and understand things better.  Perhaps you would be prepared to embellish a little deeper.......or point me in the direction of stuff that is already written.

Thanks 

[Fluff 0]

As soon as a lad hits 16 and has left school, the 90 minutes does not matter or that would be seen as restriction of trade.  The 90 minutes were brought in to protect the kids from having to over travel and over stress.  It was also brought in to add some fairness to the previous system which allowed clubs to go far and wide. 

The real issue is how the FA governs youth football.  The mini leagues that are in place now for kids 6 and over were originally set up to be non-competative without league tables. This was to give EVERY kid the chance to play football and to ENJOY the experience.  Unfortunately the leagues have become competative with more and more (so called) coaches getting involved.  These lads are more pidgeon holed into a position than they ever were before so never get the freedom to try new positions or learn the positional game.  This is having a knock on.  When the lads hit u-11, they then go from 6 a side to 11 a side with almost full size goals and almost full size pitches resulting in high score lines!  There is no in between.  This is leading to kids getting brassed with being on the end of a 11 goal drubbing and the competative coaches having a hiss fitt, the kids then go off and pick up PSP''s! 

Another issue is by the time kids hit 11, those in the academy have been involved there for a couple of years but may not develop into 6 foot 6 hoofers (that Worthy wanted) and so be released, this leaves gaps, and to fill those gaps, you have to go out and find kids with the potential to succeed whilst looking for the physical attributes too, unfortunately you tend to find the kids that have been told that they are the best thing since sliced bread by over competative parents and only ever played in one position!  (see the dodgy loop yet?)

Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridge which were all regularly scouted by city scouts has some fantastic youth football, on par with anywhere.  Street kids do exist, but they tend all to want to be Joe Cole and can keep a ball up and do tricks but put them on a full size pitch and they are ordinary.  The thing is, youth football with the millions thrown at it is missing out totally.  The FA needs to look at the structure and more importantly the coaches.  Go to a under 12''s game this week and see how many (so called) coaches it takes to run a side.  Listen to their technique of communication, look at the conduct of the parents and watch the kids.  One team (which will remain nameless) in Norwich which is seen as the best youth club will have two or three coaches (dads) positioned just yelling.

The FA coaching badges are worthless.  Anyone with £65 can get one, plus the cash to renew it, then the cash for the books.......  The true good coaches are those who have been involved for years and got the badge before the local governments and Macdonalds started paying for anyone to have one and I mean anyone!  It is a massive cash making excersise.  The real coaches are there for love and all have their UEFA qualifications (they cost thousands to get). 

[Carlos Valderrama 0]

Thanks flufty.  Very very interesting post, I know exactly the sort of competitive dad you are talking about.  I honestly hope to god I am not like that with my boys when they are old enough.......

[Saint Canary 0]

[quote user="fluffty"]

As soon as a lad hits 16 and has left school, the 90 minutes does not matter or that would be seen as restriction of trade.  The 90 minutes were brought in to protect the kids from having to over travel and over stress.  It was also brought in to add some fairness to the previous system which allowed clubs to go far and wide. 

The real issue is how the FA governs youth football.  The mini leagues that are in place now for kids 6 and over were originally set up to be non-competative without league tables. This was to give EVERY kid the chance to play football and to ENJOY the experience.  Unfortunately the leagues have become competative with more and more (so called) coaches getting involved.  These lads are more pidgeon holed into a position than they ever were before so never get the freedom to try new positions or learn the positional game.  This is having a knock on.  When the lads hit u-11, they then go from 6 a side to 11 a side with almost full size goals and almost full size pitches resulting in high score lines!  There is no in between.  This is leading to kids getting brassed with being on the end of a 11 goal drubbing and the competative coaches having a hiss fitt, the kids then go off and pick up PSP''s! 

Another issue is by the time kids hit 11, those in the academy have been involved there for a couple of years but may not develop into 6 foot 6 hoofers (that Worthy wanted) and so be released, this leaves gaps, and to fill those gaps, you have to go out and find kids with the potential to succeed whilst looking for the physical attributes too, unfortunately you tend to find the kids that have been told that they are the best thing since sliced bread by over competative parents and only ever played in one position!  (see the dodgy loop yet?)

Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridge which were all regularly scouted by city scouts has some fantastic youth football, on par with anywhere.  Street kids do exist, but they tend all to want to be Joe Cole and can keep a ball up and do tricks but put them on a full size pitch and they are ordinary.  The thing is, youth football with the millions thrown at it is missing out totally.  The FA needs to look at the structure and more importantly the coaches.  Go to a under 12''s game this week and see how many (so called) coaches it takes to run a side.  Listen to their technique of communication, look at the conduct of the parents and watch the kids.  One team (which will remain nameless) in Norwich which is seen as the best youth club will have two or three coaches (dads) positioned just yelling.

The FA coaching badges are worthless.  Anyone with £65 can get one, plus the cash to renew it, then the cash for the books.......  The true good coaches are those who have been involved for years and got the badge before the local governments and Macdonalds started paying for anyone to have one and I mean anyone!  It is a massive cash making excersise.  The real coaches are there for love and all have their UEFA qualifications (they cost thousands to get). 

[/quote]

Great post.

I agree entirely with that and I have to say the FA have got their heads in the sand in relation to youth football.  We have academies and youth football systems that are simply failing. 

We are too fixated on certain aspects, testing kids to try and determine how tall they will be in 5,6,7 years times, teaching kids a team ethic before allowing them to develop individual styles.  Most worrying of all we are basing too much emphasis on athletic ability over technical prowess.  This works well in some respects but you only have to look at the current crop of England players, especially the midfielders to see where this works and where it doesn''t.  Looking at the midfield players available to England they are so similar.  Lampard, Gerrard, Carrick, Barton, Parker, Hargreaves, Jenas, Nolan (and I could go on) can all be described as busy players with good engines but you would not say any of them are flair players.  What we are doing is creating generations of Bryan Robson''s and Paul Ince''s but no Hoddle''s or Gazza''s.  To me this is a big problem, we even struggle to find pacey wingers who can run with the ball.  You know this is true when you see how excitement is generated by the prospect of Lennon or Wright Phillips.  Truth is we are producing robotic footballers, which is why we have so many good defenders to choose from but are struggling in the attacking area''s.  

I don''t know if anyone saw football focus a few weeks back they interviewed from Sporting Lisbon''s youth set up who stated that kids in England spend almost half the amount of time actually training with a football than they do in Portugal.  The most worrying thing was a guy from the England Academy seemed to dismiss it as not being a problem.  It goes a long way to explaining why a lot of countries players seem a lot more comfortable with the ball than ours do.

Getting back to City, I think we should go down route that Spurs have taken and employ good foreign youth coaches to work at our academy to try and get more out of the players.  At the least we should try and adopt some of the methods of coaching.  We need to adopt new approaches to training youth because in recent years we have seen scant reward for the money being spent on the academy.  Only Green, Shackell and Martin (potentially) have come through the ranks in recent years and proved valuable first team players.  You can argue that maybe the talent just isn''t there but surely it''s worth trying a different approach to see if some of the youngsters react better and improve more?