2011 U-20 World Cup

B0dunrin wrote:

polska. wrote:

B0dunrin wrote:Nigeria have a good chance.

That's cause they field 24-28 year olds.

Just a stereotype in most cases

We'll see come the competition and Nigeria fields a team twice the size of the other.

Looks like F is the group of death. Mexico will pull through

Yeah Group F looks interesting.

GCU new zealand are the champions of Oceania.
add them

How is england at the youth level?

10RLegend wrote:How is england at the youth level?

coady

updated op

GCU wrote:updated op

Didn't they teach you how to spell in aussie school or are you angry we won your title??

Just did some anoraking. To play in the U20 WC this summer you have to be born after January 1st 1991. After looking at the squads of teams both in the U20 WC and the U21's, the number of players who are on the U21 squad and born after this cut-off point is 6 in total.

Our squad could have:

Caulker
Phil Jones
Rodwell
Wilshere
McEachran
Mutch
Chamberlain
Delfouneso
Wickham

Obviously some of those wont play, but age wise those are some that can and it's not a bad group.

ahlycotc wrote:If England actually cares about having a good NT team for the future, they would invest more money and effort in youth teams, especially the U20/21.

That's exactly what we're doing...

GCU wrote:man you cant compare spain and england, spain took a very competitive squad to the last u20 world cup talent wise and always take good squads, they respect the competition.

and even when germany cant take their best squad due to club commitments they still try to take a competittive squad

but england basically insulted the competition with the embarrassment they brought last time, they were by far the worst team in the competition. if the same happens this time whats the point of qualifying for the u20 world cup, they should be barred from

england at the end of the day care more about the u21 euro simply because its easier to win and they are allowed to play overage players, for them its a good substitute for the olympics

What a whole heap of shit that post is.

GCU wrote:man you cant compare spain and england, spain took a very competitive squad to the last u20 world cup talent wise and always take good squads, they respect the competition.

and even when germany cant take their best squad due to club commitments they still try to take a competittive squad

but england basically insulted the competition with the embarrassment they brought last time, they were by far the worst team in the competition. if the same happens this time whats the point of qualifying for the u20 world cup, they should be barred from

england at the end of the day care more about the u21 euro simply because its easier to win and they are allowed to play overage players, for them its a good substitute for the olympics

100% correct in all aspects

You can try and twist it to suggest that we're lacking talent, but the simple fact is that we've been winners or big contenders at all other age levels....and this is not a coincidence, we just haven't taken the u20's seriously in recent times.

We have more than enough young talent, anyone who says otherwise would have to be someone who bases their opinions on outdated English stereotypes.

-Do you have any clue about any English clubs/England's national team youth systems?
-Do you have any clue about the financial support these projects are given?
-Do you have any reason to prove why u20's are so important, and that not taking it seriously has such consequences that it gives you license to sum up that England's youth system is rubbish, negligent and focuses only on big athletic physical players with no focus on technique?

If you don't then you don't really have a case at all.

I wouldn't say that taking the u20's seriously would do any harm....but that's without all the factors of football, the clubs and the calendar taken into consideration.

u22's aren't taken seriously, I don't start saying that every countries youth is rubbish though......

Lux wrote:You can try and twist it to suggest that we're lacking talent, but the simple fact is that we've been winners or big contenders at all other age levels....and this is not a coincidence, we just haven't taken the u20's seriously in recent times.

We have more than enough young talent, anyone who says otherwise would have to be someone who bases their opinions on outdated English stereotypes.

-Do you have any clue about any English clubs/England's national team youth systems?
-Do you have any clue about the financial support these projects are given?
-Do you have any reason to prove why u20's are so important, and that not taking it seriously has such consequences that it gives you license to sum up that England's youth system is rubbish, negligent and focuses only on big athletic physical players with no focus on technique?

If you don't then you don't really have a case at all.

I wouldn't say that taking the u20's seriously would do any harm....but that's without all the factors of football, the clubs and the calendar taken into consideration.

u22's aren't taken seriously, I don't start saying that every countries youth is rubbish though......

winners? see you must stop right there

trying to win things at youth level is major reason why england are so crap and technically poor. "winning" over "playing well" is systematic mentality of english people and especially coaches. instead of try to coach young player the basic and appreciations on how to play football to have fun, 7 year olds are being coached by people with no coaching badges and are basically just parents of other kids only worried about winning games to show off to other parents

do you know how much money england FA pledged top youth development and research in 2000? 20 million a year attempt to restructure english football

you know how much was actually done? only 12 million has been used over the last 7 years. infact the major contributor in this section is the epl. why is epl responsibility to help youth? the fa have not done anything and isntead they allowing trevor brooking to create random jobs for any random person needing paycheck. one of england worst coaches involved internationall, stuart pearce is about to have his contract renewed. this is a man that is perfect descipton of tactically clueless and you know he does not even do reseach or coordinate with his fellow coaches at other levels. why is this being happening? very unproffesional. brooking then used more money to 'invent' new job possition for gareth southgate, something to do with youth development? still to this day it has not even beeing explained at all.

otu of all the 'big' european countries, england has the least qualified coaches with full badges and credentials. infact, france, italy, spain have almost 4 times as many while germany have almost 5 times. this filters down to lesser and lesser qualified coaches working with young players.

england doesnt even have its own coaching headquarters lol, to get full accredition to coach proffesionally coaches must go overseas(specifically italy) for full credit.

england is just a country of unfulfilled promises and no ambition,

let me tell you a funny story. i have uncle that lives in england and has his own family, he is a teacher. he tell me one time there was a youth rep that came from the FA to his school in birmingham as part of co-ordinative program to see what kind of kids in football there were, they playing some 5 a side game and the rep selected 4 kids to represent the school in a skills program in london. those 4 kids that he selected were just big fast boys who had loud voices. 1 kid who was a beast futsal player with brilliance technique did not even get mention, so my uncle fronted the rep and politely told him his thoughts, and the rep lol said to him "look old man, football has come along since your time" and then my uncle showed him his a and b uefa pro liscence and asked the rep had he done any sort of courses and the rep guy just stood there like an idiot until he slowly walked away

england cannot expect to progress when to many coach are uneducated


it took england 100 years to produce a team that could play fluid tiki taka football that u17 england team attempted last year. but for that 1 team, those u21, u19 and u16 teams are still coach by old people to focused on winning, and even not doing researches with clubs for player availability. you know stuart pearce constantly calls up squads where up to 10 people usually drop out because he doesnt know that they are injured. he doesnt even ring any players and then ruins younger teams like noel blake u19 team by stealing his players to make up his numbers

and lol brian eastick, he is how we say a "nut gobbler" how he is still employ by the FA is very much a mystery, you wanna talk about old school hoof coaches, he is a king of this art. he does not even have a job at the FA other than "coach" those useless u20 teams that england sends to world cups

youth facitlies in country like spain and holland are among the best, even amatuer clubs for u-10 teams have properly set up pitch and indoor stadia, proper equipment made completely available to people run by fully accredited coaches full time

but in england they play in muddy cow paddock and their coach is "jimmys dad" you see the difference? you think fa spending money on youth haha, what a silly naive thinking, the fa have spending very little and when they did spend it, they spent millions on an internal review into "technique" 2 years ago when i could of answered this question for them for free

a report was done in holland on 70 amateur clubs to accumulate their facilities and it equate to roughly 3 million euro worth each and 10 billion altogether, this alone far surpasses english academies and these are just amateurs. you include fact that holland less than half size of england, england are backwards

i would very much like to know your experience with youth scene lux, i would liking to be enlightened on your thoughts. youth development is not about rich epl clubs building their own academies. youth scholars in their teens have already done 90% of their technical development, it is very very difficults and almost impossible for any rapid improvement after age 14 as your cognitive abilities to control and to manipulate have already manifested permanently. imost important ages for technique is 7-13. in great football countries kids those ages are play on small pitches, for fun and enjoyment, promotion on taking many touches and individualism.

in england(and many other british centric coaching schemes like australia and usa) to to many of those kids are playing under situation to "win at all costs"

england will never become successful until more people get their coaching courses done properly and old mentality "to win" is erradicated. if england did this in the 70s like every other major country was doing, england would not be in this situation but instead england just standed by watching nation, after nation, surpass them technically and tactically

by the way from my experience, im not good player, im just average, but i never playing on full size pitch regularly until i was 14(when i came to australia, no surprise)

yet in those countries there are little kids age 8 and 9 playing on big pitches lmao, this is where long ball is stem and encouraged from. you must minimize the pitch to encourage short passing

England > all
Deal with it Mauro

I've had mixed experiences with English youth, and many of the problems you've brought up are true and need addressing.....but there is progress being made and that takes time.

Maybe I was just lucky....but when I started playing it was one of my team mate's dad who coached the team.....but he was an ex professional footballer with badges (he now coaches/scouts for Brentford). Football is a winning game.....so whilst it wasn't the only objective obviously everyone wants to win. We didn't use tactics to win.....we used tactics to play football.....and as we were a great team we won. By 10 we were playing on big pitches....which was maybe too soon but I think the FA are changing it.....

I wouldn't say it affected the team too much....because our youth facilities in our area are excellent. I spent a short time at Watford's academy (regarded as one of the best in England/Europe).....but in recent times I've played at/watched my younger brother play at amateur level clubs with very good facilities.

We've always had a lot of five-a-side pitches around us.......admittedly they're more often private than run by clubs......but most use them in some aspect anyway. Maybe the proof in this is that my brother's team won the UK futsal championship even though some professional clubs entered.

So I'd say that my area is very much above standards in England...so it's hard for me to say....I have had my bad experiences though. My brother is at college right now and he plays with Wealdstone in the college scheme (the club Beckford came from) and it's a shambles......the coaches are retards and play former big fast students who were 19/20/21 just to win....and leave out some students who are actually meant to be playing. They are a tier 7 club.....that said another tier 7 club I was at was the most technically focused club I'd ever seen.....

I think that top clubs have good coaches these days.....and most great players get picked up at a very early age.....way before 14. I think England's youth teams are good and have the right mentality.....if you even watch them you'd see that....I've watched most of the youth levels recently and they've been playing good football. Sure....there are big fast black guys in football....but there's nothing wrong with that...even at the top level they can be great for what they possess.

The bottom of the barrel is generally pretty poor....some of the coaches are unbelievably retarded....so hopefully that is improved.

Will this be on TV at all?

Egypt beat Mali to grab 3rd place in the African Youth Championship. The final is being played right now between Cameroon and Nigeria.

Nigeria will win both tournaments