Sorry meant to back up the above with this: Uefa data shows that there are only 2,769 English coaches holding Uefa's B, A and Pro badges, its top qualifications. Spain has produced 23,995, Italy 29,420, Germany 34,970 and France 17,588.
A friend of mine who does my accounts at work was at a party with one of the young new Charlton owners. He is an Ipswich fan but did ask if there was anything happening new at Charlton. He was told about the ludicrous wage demands and that Charlton are now looking further afield to sign new talent.
There are 2.25 million players in England and only one Uefa-qualified coach for every 812 people playing the game. Spain have 408,134 players, giving a ratio of 1:17. In Italy the ratio is 1:48, in France it is 1:96, Germany 1:150 and even Greece have only 180,000 registered players for their 1,100 coaches, a ratio of 1:135.
we are generally no better or worse than we have ever been - we've had the occassional high (1966) and many lows where we've probably been worse than now. Our press definitely over hype our players - we have half a decent national side and in the prem we buy in what we don't have - the gifted playmakers. Probably is a bit to do with coaching but must also just be that we don't have as naturally a gifted gene pool as the brazilians, italians, germans, spanish etc - sad but true although it doesn't stop us having what i genuinely believe is the most exciting brand of league football. Watching our national side is like pulling teeth but i agree that we can give most nations a game - i.e compete with them which is what i think the crazy fool, Murdoch was saying. When it comes to the crunch we lose against the top teams but we can still just about compete. (until the opposition scores that is)
Interesting view BD, but I think we would benefit from pro-actively backing the belief that coaching rather than genetics is the best route for improvement.
Our current policy in increasing qualified coaches will put us level with those genetic supermen of Spain in approximately 125 years, providing they dont go and train up any more coaches, but those cunning fellas might just do that rather than rely on heredetory molecular structure!
Interesting view BD, but I think we would benefit from pro-actively backing the belief that coaching rather than genetics is the best route for improvement.
Our current policy in increasing qualified coaches will put us level with those genetic supermen of Spain in approximately 125 years, providing they dont go and train up any more coaches, but those cunning fellas might just do that rather than rely on heredetory molecular structure!
Nobody is saying that coaching wouldn't help but you must agree that as a race, Brazil for instance, have natural attributes that make them great players. 15 years ago it was all about we needed a foreign coach - now we've proved we are equally as second rate with one, we are now going down the grass roots / coaching excuse. I agree, there has been, in the lasty 30 years an emphasis on power and athleticism in English youth football. The likes of Semedo would have been laughed off the pitch 30 years ago as he's clearly nota natural footballer but they can earn a crust in the 3rd tier here now because there are big squads of well paid playersa staying in the top division rather than spreading out through the leagues. Anyway, the point is - natural abvility will always make up 95% of it so i wouldn't get too hung up on the coaching. As a general rule, when i walk over the park on Saturday morning, the coaches with more cones and poles laid out generally tend to never have played the game and normally have the worst teams.
I really don't think we have any major problems within the game Internationally. We punch our weight, and although unlikely to win anything but are a team feared by most. Have had a lot of problems with fatigue and injuries but what do you expect with players playing week in week out in the premiership. It's so competetive it has got to have an effect.
I think our culture doesn't help, obsession with partying, boozing, coke, celebrity culture, wags etc. Huge distractions at all the wrong times for young players. It effects so many of our players no matter how over-coached and closeted they are from it.
Sorry BD, but that is utter nonsense and the sort of woolly-minded thinking that leaves us about 10th in the world, but believing we can win the World Cup or European cup every time, despite 44 years of evidence against it. If your crazy genetics idea was true, why havent your genetic supermen won every tournament?
I will tell you why, COACHING. It is not an excuse, its the reason. Far more so than your ''we dont have a hope because the other lot are genetically better.''
Like Murdoch you might have decided not to get 'hung up on' coaching, and there are many like you. Which is why we are in the state we are in.
It beggars belief that you think our paucity of caoches doesnt have an effect. But then your in depth sample of 'a walk in the park on a Saturday' probably explains your point of view.
Even Gordon Taylor knew this "There is a link between coaching and quality. How you do internationally is a proper reflection of your nation's youth development."
or the LMA Its chief executive, Richard Bevan, said: "Historically there has been a significant lack of investment in the provision of management support and training programmes for the development of young coaches and managers''
Or the Rugby Football League chairman who was commissioned to lead a joint youth-development study for the Football Association, Premier League and Football League
"It is no coincidence that sports achieving success on the international stage place great store on quality coaching – not just at the highest level but right throughout the athlete and player development pathway."
He recommended that "the system of coaching and player development should be so enhanced that there is an increasing stream of better young players qualified to play for England – players who have been better coached from a very young age, and who have the technical, physical and mental skills to succeed at the very highest international level."
I really don't think we have any major problems within the game Internationally. So you are happy with our international performance since 1966? We were recently ranked 13th in the world - our worst ranking ever. England failed to qualify in 1974, 1978 and 1994. We punch our weight, No we dont and although unlikely to win anything but are a team feared by most. You are joking, right? I saw the fear on the mighty USA team in the last world cup
Have had a lot of problems with fatigue and injuries but what do you expect with players playing week in week out in the premiership. It's so competetive it has got to have an effect.
I think our culture doesn't help, obsession with partying, boozing, coke, celebrity culture, wags etc. Huge distractions at all the wrong times for young players. It effects so many of our players When I lived in Sao Paolo, it was clear the culture, cheap coke, illicit booze and abject poverty were, shall we say, a tad worse than England. no matter how over-coached and closeted they are from it. You are not getting it are you? We are not over coached. Not even close to it. Please glance at the figures posted above.
Sorry BD, but that is utter nonsense and the sort of woolly-minded thinking that leaves us about 10th in the world, but believing we can win the World Cup or European cup every time, despite 44 years of evidence against it. If your crazy genetics idea was true, why havent your genetic supermen won every tournament?
I will tell you why, COACHING. It is not an excuse, its the reason. Far more so than your ''we dont have a hope because the other lot are genetically better.''
Like Murdoch you might have decided not to get 'hung up on' coaching, and there are many like you. Which is why we are in the state we are in.
It beggars belief that you think our paucity of caoches doesnt have an effect. But then your in depth sample of 'a walk in the park on a Saturday' probably explains your point of view.
Even Gordon Taylor knew this "There is a link between coaching and quality. How you do internationally is a proper reflection of your nation's youth development."
or the LMA Its chief executive, Richard Bevan, said: "Historically there has been a significant lack of investment in the provision of management support and training programmes for the development of young coaches and managers''
Or the Rugby Football League chairman who was commissioned to lead a joint youth-development study for the Football Association, Premier League and Football League
"It is no coincidence that sports achieving success on the international stage place great store on quality coaching – not just at the highest level but right throughout the athlete and player development pathway."
He recommended that "the system of coaching and player development should be so enhanced that there is an increasing stream of better young players qualified to play for England – players who have been better coached from a very young age, and who have the technical, physical and mental skills to succeed at the very highest international level."
Feathering their nests, the lot of em. The genetic supermen? About 5 or 6 teams always win the tournaments and it ain't us coz we're cak.
So by your thinking Bexley Dan, the GB cycling teams massive improvement is nothing to do with hiring the best coaches from around the world, designing better equipment, improving training techniques and building state of the art velodromes. It could only have happened because the cyclists took genetic injections, probably taken from the placenta's of Brazilian mothers.
I thought your "better than Semedo stance" was a great wind up, this is just plain daft though.
So by your thinking Bexley Dan, the GB cycling teams massive improvement is nothing to do with hiring the best coaches from around the world, designing better equipment, improving training techniques and building state of the art velodromes. It could only have happened because the cyclists took genetic injections, probably taken from the placenta's of Brazilian mothers.
I thought your "better than Semedo stance" was a great wind up, this is just plain daft though.
don't class cycling as a sport - no skill involved.
So by your thinking Bexley Dan, the GB cycling teams massive improvement is nothing to do with hiring the best coaches from around the world, designing better equipment, improving training techniques and building state of the art velodromes. It could only have happened because the cyclists took genetic injections, probably taken from the placenta's of Brazilian mothers.
I thought your "better than Semedo stance" was a great wind up, this is just plain daft though.
don't class cycling as a sport - no skill involved.
I was expecting a "I'm a better cyclist than Chris Foy" response, so a bit disappointed!
I can't see what the fuss is about - coaching helps but its about time we also got real and stopped thinking there has to be a reason why we aren't the best in the world, Aspire by all means but if we lowered our expectations a bit, we might enjoy the whole international football scene a bit more. Nothing crazy about that and if you guys can't grasp it, that ain't my problem.
Have to agree with B.D. There are so many reasons we are not as good as spain, just lay the blame at the door of coaching is wrong.
So, if you two want to continue this wind-up, how about producing a more plausible reason than ''genetics'', or the very lame ''there are so many reasons'' Name a few. Your lazy, ('about time we stop thinking there is a reason') defeatist attitude encapsulates the problem with football in this country. Do you think the rugby, cycling, athletics, cricket teams have this pathetic attitude?
Bearing in mind earlier you stated that only Spain are a good football team, despite Germany being World champions and the others I mentioned with coaching statistics all having won more championships than england. EVEN GREECE who only have 180,000 registered players.
There is no one else I would describe as a great team at the moment. With our first choice squad available, and matchfit, England could put out onto the field one of the top sides around and I would not be suprised if we beat, lost or drew with any of the other top Nations. They are all beatable as are we.
Reasons for our players not being as good as the current Spanish side. Individually lacking in the coordination, balance, pace, awareness, speed of thought, cohesion, concentration, intelligence, comradship. We are by an large a team of individuals, too many chiefs not enough Indians. The team has no consistency with constant injuries, some valid others not and the added pressures from clubs forcing players to be rested. Club always comes first. They pay the huge wages, they get the best of you.
I do not believe England have a great team. But with our best players fit and playing, on our day, we are a team to fear. As are Holland, Brazil, Germany, Argentina etc. I would feel confident playing any of them we could compete. I imagine their fans would be thinking this could go either way too.
So apart from individually lacking in the coordination, balance, pace, awareness, speed of thought, cohesion, concentration, intelligence, comradship. Being by and large a team of individuals, too many chiefs not enough Indians and having no consistency because of constant injuries. What else have the Romans done for us make the Spanish a better team?
So apart from individually lacking in the coordination, balance, pace, awareness, speed of thought, cohesion, concentration, intelligence, comradship. Being by and large a team of individuals, too many chiefs not enough Indians and having no consistency because of constant injuries. What else have the Romans done for us make the Spanish a better team?
chorizo - the magic ingredient. Trust me, it's the new jaffa cake.
Comments
Uefa data shows that there are only 2,769 English coaches holding Uefa's
B, A and Pro badges, its top qualifications. Spain has produced 23,995,
Italy 29,420, Germany 34,970 and France 17,588.
Surely you can see the problem, Murdoch?
There are 2.25 million players in England and only one Uefa-qualified
coach for every 812 people playing the game.
Spain have 408,134 players, giving a ratio of 1:17.
In Italy the ratio is 1:48, in
France it is 1:96,
Germany 1:150
and even
Greece have only 180,000 registered
players for their 1,100 coaches, a ratio of 1:135.
We are around about 10th in the World.Sometimes alittle higher sometimes alittle lower.
Our current policy in increasing qualified coaches will put us level with those genetic supermen of Spain in approximately 125 years, providing they dont go and train up any more coaches, but those cunning fellas might just do that rather than rely on heredetory molecular structure!
Or do we want to improve?
Because at the moment we arent doing anything to change, and a lot of players are missing out as a result.
If your crazy genetics idea was true, why havent your genetic supermen won every tournament?
I will tell you why, COACHING. It is not an excuse, its the reason. Far more so than your ''we dont have a hope because the other lot are genetically better.''
Like Murdoch you might have decided not to get 'hung up on' coaching, and there are many like you. Which is why we are in the state we are in.
It beggars belief that you think our paucity of caoches doesnt have an effect. But then your in depth sample of 'a walk in the park on a Saturday' probably explains your point of view.
Even Gordon Taylor knew this
"There is a link between coaching and quality.
How you do internationally
is a proper reflection of your nation's youth development."
or the LMA
Its chief executive, Richard Bevan, said: "Historically there has been a
significant lack of investment in the provision of management support
and training programmes for the development of young coaches and
managers''
Or the Rugby Football League chairman
who was commissioned to lead a joint youth-development study for the
Football Association, Premier League and Football League
"It is no coincidence that sports achieving success on the international
stage place great store on quality coaching – not just at the highest
level but right throughout the athlete and player development pathway."
He
recommended that "the system of coaching and player development should
be so enhanced that there is an increasing stream of better young
players qualified to play for England – players who have been better
coached from a very young age, and who have the technical, physical and
mental skills to succeed at the very highest international level."
none of which could possibly ever be coached into them, obviously!
So by your thinking Bexley Dan, the GB cycling teams massive improvement is nothing to do with hiring the best coaches from around the world, designing better equipment, improving training techniques and building state of the art velodromes. It could only have happened because the cyclists took genetic injections, probably taken from the placenta's of Brazilian mothers.
I thought your "better than Semedo stance" was a great wind up, this is just plain daft though.
I was expecting a "I'm a better cyclist than Chris Foy" response, so a bit disappointed!So, if you two want to continue this wind-up, how about producing a more plausible reason than ''genetics'', or the very lame ''there are so many reasons''
Name a few. Your lazy, ('about time we stop thinking there is a reason') defeatist attitude encapsulates the problem with football in this country. Do you think the rugby, cycling, athletics, cricket teams have this pathetic attitude?
Bearing in mind earlier you stated that only Spain are a good football team, despite Germany being World champions and the others I mentioned with coaching statistics all having won more championships than england. EVEN GREECE who only have 180,000 registered players.
Oopps, of course it was a deliberate error and everybody knows i meant Chris Hoy!