Re.: Dyke, Model football? (Warning: Long rant)
pinno
Posts: 52,089
I did not get a sense in Greg Dykes speech that there was going to be a serious legislative framework for football in the UK.
Some may be quizzical about that statement. Youth academies, training just like education in the UK is entirely voluntarist, ad hoc.
Ok, in Spain minimum release clauses are not compulsory but pretty mandatory and accross the board. A small club may not retain a player of potential/talent, but they will retain the players value - youth contracts are in the smaller clubs favour. These youth contracts are common and are protected to the age of 21. It makes sense for a small club to invest in quality coaches and coaching because they will sell players on to bigger clubs, hence the reason that youth development is huge in Spain. Youth grant income is paid partly by the Spanish FA and youth training facilities set up costs are also partly covered by the SFA.
In Italy, co-ownership is common and to the extent that a big club buying a player under the co-ownership schemewill allow the player to stay at his current club because they know that the quality of coaching is going to be good and up to a high standard.
In Holland, football clubs form part of the community, with bike racks, even train stops right to the front door of the club and they don't only teach football. Everybody in local communities gets involved. Its the extension of the 'total football' philosophy both on and off the pitch - regardless of what people may think of the merits of total football.
So if Dyke is not willing to challenge the hegemony of the Premier league and all its vested interests and is not willing to put some sort of framwork in, how can things possibly change? Why do we British not use foreign examples
of excellence in any sphere of our society? Why are we so arrogant that we presume that the way we do things is both sustainable and effective*?
* The exception: Cycling in the UK has benefitted enormously by a coherent strategy and in a relativley small timescale, we have achieved great success.
Some may be quizzical about that statement. Youth academies, training just like education in the UK is entirely voluntarist, ad hoc.
Ok, in Spain minimum release clauses are not compulsory but pretty mandatory and accross the board. A small club may not retain a player of potential/talent, but they will retain the players value - youth contracts are in the smaller clubs favour. These youth contracts are common and are protected to the age of 21. It makes sense for a small club to invest in quality coaches and coaching because they will sell players on to bigger clubs, hence the reason that youth development is huge in Spain. Youth grant income is paid partly by the Spanish FA and youth training facilities set up costs are also partly covered by the SFA.
In Italy, co-ownership is common and to the extent that a big club buying a player under the co-ownership schemewill allow the player to stay at his current club because they know that the quality of coaching is going to be good and up to a high standard.
In Holland, football clubs form part of the community, with bike racks, even train stops right to the front door of the club and they don't only teach football. Everybody in local communities gets involved. Its the extension of the 'total football' philosophy both on and off the pitch - regardless of what people may think of the merits of total football.
So if Dyke is not willing to challenge the hegemony of the Premier league and all its vested interests and is not willing to put some sort of framwork in, how can things possibly change? Why do we British not use foreign examples
of excellence in any sphere of our society? Why are we so arrogant that we presume that the way we do things is both sustainable and effective*?
* The exception: Cycling in the UK has benefitted enormously by a coherent strategy and in a relativley small timescale, we have achieved great success.
seanoconn - gruagach craic!
0
Comments
-
No takers
seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
pinarello001 wrote:No takers
It's too long for us lot. Could you please summarise it in a haiku?0 -
johnfinch wrote:pinarello001 wrote:No takers
It's too long for us lot. Could you please summarise it in a haiku?
Dyke you cnut.
Remove the vested interests of the premier league from the FA
Put in mandatory minium fee release clauses for under all 21's in a youth development programme
Spend the huge amounts of money supporting clubs to build youth academies to the tune of 50% of costs.
Help pay all staff costs for youth development to the tune of 50%
Okay Finchy?seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
There's too much money at the top level in the game in England. and too much emphasise on instant success.
Any UK youth with a modicum of talent or ability will have been scouted and thrown in to the club academy system from the age of 7 onwards.
There really is a massive differentiation in standards across the academies and no interest in the larger clubs supporting the development of youth players or coaches further down the chain.
As you say there appears to be more collaboration and interest in maintaining a good standard of coaching and youth development across the board in Holland, France, Spain et al. But it would appear in this country that the larger clubs are far too interested in finding the next Gareth Bale and securing their services before the competition, that they wouldn't risk allowing them to develop at a more sustainable pace with a smaller club.
A friends lad (Ex Forest and Liverpool, now Bristol City) started off at 8 with West Brom was traded to Liverpool age 14 with a £50,000 sell on clause which would expire if West Brom didn't let him go before his 16th Birthday.
The club is then left with Taking a risk on developing him themselves and getting nothing back for their investment or receiving the Money if Liverpool ever trade him on, which they did.
In an ideal world all clubs should receive a payment or a Levy from the FA for each UK based under 16 player they coach or develop. They should not be allowed to trade this player until they are at least 16, their contract should be held by the F.A itself.
The player may then be traded to any club at age 16 with the F.A and the developing club receiving a 50/50 split of the fee, which the FA then uses part of to support the Levy paid to all clubs developing pre 16 uk based players.
I think the emergence of Clubs like P.S.G in France and the continuation of the spending powers of clubs like Real Madrid, will unfortunately mean we will see the continental clubs shifting towards our model rather than us moving towards theirs.
Dyke has no real power or control. There is little interest in the National game compared with the World Wide obsession with the Premiership, so little will change.0 -
I don't follow football close enough to appreciate the subtleties but my take would be this...
Those at the top of the tree are doing very nicely thank you. Why would they allow any external 3rd party upset the apple cart?
I never used to believe in the US franchise system as Europe had a club culture. Today I think the club culture is a romantic delusion. Pro football is first and foremost a business. A franchise system would bring far more equality and makes far more sense. But it won't ever happen and I'm not going to argue for it.0 -
I doubt Greg Dyke could implement radical change even if he wanted to - the FA lost control of the game at the top level with the creation of the Premier League - something which Dyke was involved in of course.
it's a hard life if you don't weaken.0 -
The FA may think they run the game in England but everyone else knows the reality is that the big clubs have all the power. They can walk away today and set up a rival league and the TV / advertising revenue will go with them and England can kiss goodbye to whatever (virtually non-existent) control they have on international players.0
-
pinarello001 wrote:johnfinch wrote:pinarello001 wrote:No takers
It's too long for us lot. Could you please summarise it in a haiku?
Dyke you cnut.
Remove the vested interests of the premier league from the FA
Put in mandatory minium fee release clauses for under all 21's in a youth development programme
Spend the huge amounts of money supporting clubs to build youth academies to the tune of 50% of costs.
Help pay all staff costs for youth development to the tune of 50%
Okay Finchy?
That's not a haiku.0 -
Greg Dyke made a speech
On how he would change football
His solution is...
...oh damn, ran out of space0 -
morstar wrote:I don't follow football close enough to appreciate the subtleties but my take would be this...
Those at the top of the tree are doing very nicely thank you. Why would they allow any external 3rd party upset the apple cart?
I never used to believe in the US franchise system as Europe had a club culture. Today I think the club culture is a romantic delusion. Pro football is first and foremost a business. A franchise system would bring far more equality and makes far more sense. But it won't ever happen and I'm not going to argue for it.
It's about money but not necessarily business, look at how much Abramovich has sunk into Chelsea which he'll never see again, that's certainly no way to run a business, same with Man. Citys owners.
Sticking with Chelsea I read that they farmed out 25 players on loans or being let go up until the transfer deadline, a lot of them decent young talent lesser teams are crying out for...that's 25 on top of their 25-man designated premier league squad. When a club is able to have that much control over so many players it's no wonder we've problems.
As for Dyke's words. I can remember Brian Barwick standing outside FA headquarters giving it the '..root and branch investigation...must make changes to save the national team..blah blah' speech after Mclaren failed to get England into the Euros. What did we get? Capello on £5m a year and zero restructuring below that. Funnily enough Barwick was an ex-TV man too like Dyke and equally full of poop.0
