Sir Trevor Brooking slams 'vacuum of leadership' in English youth football

[dww]

• FA director of football says talent production is suffering
• Recommends radical change to produce top-level players

David Conn The Guardian, Wednesday 9 September 2009

Sir Trevor Brooking, the Football Association's director of football development, has criticised a "vacuum of leadership" in the game at youth level which is creating a failure to produce sufficient English players for the top clubs and national team.

In a foreword to a new book which analyses the strengths and weaknesses of England's academy system, Every Boy's Dream by Chris Green, Brooking argues: "We must all accept that for a country of some 60 million people, we are not producing the depth of players at the top level with the necessary technical skills now required by the major clubs and international teams."

Writing in a personal capacity, Brooking asserts: "If we want to increase the number of English players competing at the highest level, radical change is needed."

The comments are particularly timely given Chelsea's ban last week from buying any new players until 2011 after Fifa found that the French teenager Gaël Kakuta had a valid contract with Lens when the Premier League club signed him. Questions were asked as to why the club's academy was not producing more first-team players itself, a failure repeated at top clubs' academies generally, as Fabio Capello has reflected when pondering limited options for the senior England team.

The target of Brooking's frustration is the "vacuum of leadership" which has led to the disbandment of successive committees aimed at uniting the FA, Premier and Football Leagues in a common strategy for youth development. Since the FA's Charter for Quality, written by Howard Wilkinson in 1997, which created the academy system and allowed professional clubs to formally recruit children from as young as eight, there has, Brooking complains, been no serious updating of football's coaching system.

Three years ago Brooking suggested an elite coaching group be set up to share and spread good practice around the country but the FA and leagues turned that down in favour of a review of youth development by Richard Lewis, the executive chairman of the Rugby Football League. Lewis reported in the summer of 2007 with 64 recommendations, including the formation of a central body incorporating coaching experts, to improve the system.

A Professional Game Youth Development Group was set up, chaired by Wilkinson in April last year, but tensions between the three bodies led to it being disbanded in January and there is now no united body providing strategic leadership.

Brooking complains that the FA should be recognised as the authority to perform this function and to monitor the work being done in academies, of which there is still no independent scrutiny. The leagues argue that Brooking has been slow to develop a modern generation of FA coaching courses; he says the work has been done but the professional game has failed to invest in recruiting coaches.

"A co-ordinated coaching structure and philosophy is still desperately needed with significant investment and resources," Brooking writes in the foreword. "I have always wanted the FA, as the governing body, to lead this strategic role, as every federation does in all other Uefa countries."

[dww]

Clubs leave lost youth behind as academies fail English talent

Posted by David Conn Wednesday 9 September 2009 00.10 BST The Guardian

The Gaël Kakuta affair has highlighted the flaws of a system which ruins careers but produces few results


Players at the Liverpool academy listen to their coaches but very few talents go on to represent the first team of the top clubs. Photograph: Christopher Thomond

In the aftershock of Chelsea's sanction for signing Gaël Kakuta when the teenager was contracted to play for Lens, the most vital issue highlighted by the scandal is only slowly dawning. It is not whether Fifa should really have classed Kakuta's agreement with Lens as a contract, or whether Chelsea's lawyers will successfully nitpick the detail to claim a reduction of the two transfer window ban at the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

No, the real challenge is to understand why one of England's top football clubs, which like 40 others has spent millions of pounds developing an academy, and can sign up huge numbers of boys from a very young age, has failed to bring a local player through since 28-year-old John Terry, and scours other countries' clubs for teenage talent.

It is 12 years since Howard Wilkinson's FA document, Charter for Quality, overhauled youth development, removing good, young players from representative school and youth club football and establishing academies, thereby granting extraordinary power to the professional clubs. Wilkinson's view was that professional football clubs had expertise in coaching which schoolteachers and volunteer amateur coaches did not – although the clubs then mostly recruited schoolteachers to run their academies.

Clubs' academies – there are now 41 in the Premier and Football Leagues – were accorded the right to register 40 boys each year from as young as eight until 12. After that, youngsters are progressively shedded until, at the age of 16, 20 or so are selected as full-time "scholars".

This, according to a new book, Every Boy's Dream by Chris Green, which skilfully analyses the successes and deficiencies of the academy system, constitutes "recruitment of children on a massive scale". It also institutionalises mass rejection of young people as too few of those who come through are actually given opportunities to play in clubs' first teams.

Green, while acknowledging the investment and improvements made in the system, laments this futile recruitment of infants, finding that youth development experts themselves admit it is too young. He chronicles the disappointment, educational underachievement, even trauma, suffered by some boys who give much of their childhoods to academies only to suffer inevitable rejection at tender ages. The Premier League's general secretary, Mike Foster, is quoted as accepting that although efforts are made – not always successfully – to break bad news sensitively, his league and its clubs do not bother to find out what happens to the youngsters who are released.

Some 10,000 boys are currently performing in top clubs' academies and centres of excellence, and uncalculated thousands more in development squads and "shadow" development squads, run because youth directors have to be sure no child is being missed. Green gives due credit to the system's merits: the clubs have invested abundantly and continue to spend an estimated £66m a year on staff and mostly excellent facilities. Some of the coaching is expert, many of the staff are highly professional and dedicated.

Huw Jennings, who resigned as the Premier League's head of youth development this year to run Fulham's academy, argues this has borne fruit: "The skill levels, ball mastery, balance and flexibility of our young players is better than ever," he claims.

Yet while parents give family life over to ferrying boys to training three nights a week and matches on Sundays against other professional clubs' academies many hours' travel away, the reality is that just 1% of the trainees will ultimately play football for a living.

Even the few who survive the annual cuts and make it to a "scholarship" at 16 are likely to fall away. Research tracking academy boys is itself difficult to find but it is accepted that only a minority of boys awarded "scholarships" remain in the professional game at 21. Of those who win the golden ticket of a proper, professional contract at 18, the vast majority, Green found, are also not playing professionally at 21.

This summer, Jennings made his farewell speech to the clubs' owners and chief executives, imploring them to give academy youngsters more opportunities. In Europe, he says, players make first-team debuts at 21-22; here they are thrown into Carling Cup games or substitute appearances at an average of 18 years and four months, and judged critically on those performances. "Players are not afforded the chance to mature," he argues. "Reform is desperately needed for the 18-21 age group."

There is, startlingly, broad agreement among those who actually coach that clubs should not be signing boys as young as eight because their potential cannot be reliably assessed, and too much pressure and expectation is loaded on them at pre-teen ages. Children, most youth coaches accept, should be playing all sports recreationally, with the best coaching available, to develop all-round skills. Yet because football clubs need to stock academies beginning at Under-nine level, they are scouting children at six and even younger. Green cites the desperate instance, famed in youth football circles, of a four-year-old, scampering about in a Premier League club's development squad with a nappy clearly visible under his shorts.

Brian Jones, head of Aston Villa's academy, is scathing. "Aston Villa spend a fortune looking at boys from six years old onwards," he complains. "With the best will in the world I wouldn't know if a six, seven or eight year old is going to play in the Premier League in 10 or 12 years' time. It's ludicrous."

Dave Parnaby, another former schoolteacher who heads Middlesbrough's successful academy, agrees, arguing that registration to an academy should not start until boys are 12 and at secondary school. "No one disagrees," Parnaby asserts. "I have written to the FA and Premier League but what is being done?"

The answer, is inertia. On this most fundamental of the sport's responsibilities, there is a vacuum of leadership and a familiar, dismal turf war between the FA, Premier and Football Leagues. Trevor Brooking, the FA's director of football development, seethes with frustration that the FA is not permitted to monitor the quality of academies, and there is no central body, staffed with actual football experts like himself, to reform and run the system. The leagues argue they do not want the FA overseeing their clubs' work and that Brooking should concentrate on rolling out coaching courses tailored specifically to different ages. He argues this has been done, but the FA's Professional Game Board has failed to invest in recruiting more than a pitiful, single national coach for each of the 5-11, 12-16 and 16-plus age groups.

Jennings laments the absence of strong, national leadership. "It is football governance at its worst," he says. "We desperately need unity of purpose but youth development is in a state of limbo."

This, then, is the state we are in. Professional clubs, rich as oligarchs, trawling for boys their own coaches know are too young, giving scant opportunities to the few who come through, while waving their wallets to likelier lads in other countries. It is a system crying out for reform, from top to bottom.

[Vermilion]

Ohhhhh right, all those academys and they had to put a picture of OUUUR Academy at the head of an article on failing academys... did'nt they!!!!!

[kev776]

Ohhhhh right, all those academys and they had to put a picture of OUUUR Academy at the head of an article on failing academys... did'nt they!!!!!

Because ours is ****.

[Vermilion]

Because ours is ****.

Aren't all top acedemys in england though, that's the message here, and which has been the subject of many a conversation over recent weeks/months/years.

All of them throw up the odd player, maybe two or three big names, but none are consistently finding world class talent from their own doorstep. Even the amount of young foreign players and the cash spent on finding/getting them in doesn't produce consistent results it seems.

We spend more, so it should be logical to think we would find more young talented players that will make the top grade, but we don't seem to be any better than other countries, worse in fact according to reports.

And not just LFC either, it's across the premiership board, i would for instance, have expected utd to turn out more world class players from their academy, regularly. (and with manchester accents too).

[dww]

We have just had a complete regime change in our academy so it is clear that up to this point Rafa has felt the same as the external critics. It will be interesting to see if anything material changes - the problem with trying to rank an academy system is that it obviously takes years for changes to filter through to where you can measure their effect. Arsenal are only now starting to see the impact of Wenger's changes and they were instigated something like a decade ago.

I'm not sure that looking for 'world class players' is really the criteria to work from - the point is that there are not enough even average PL footballers coming out of the academies and most teams look abroad for players first. The only teams that over the last decade can reasonably claim to have bought through many players are Middlesborough and West Ham - both of which have largely been confined to the lower reaches of the PL (and at times to the Championship) and been severely financially restricted and Everton who the last criteria also applies to. I probably should add United to that list although recently the production line for their own team has slowed they could still point to a lot of PL players who have come through their system.

[Kenneth]

Sir Trevor Brooking, the Football Association's director of football development, has criticised a "vacuum of leadership" in the game at youth level

No irony here then? You are the fooking director of football development, you show some leadership ffs.

[Vermilion]

We have just had a complete regime change in our academy so it is clear that up to this point Rafa has felt the same as the external critics. It will be interesting to see if anything material changes - the problem with trying to rank an academy system is that it obviously takes years for changes to filter through to where you can measure their effect. Arsenal are only now starting to see the impact of Wenger's changes and they were instigated something like a decade ago.

I'm not sure that looking for 'world class players' is really the criteria to work from - the point is that there are not enough even average PL footballers coming out of the academies and most teams look abroad for players first. The only teams that over the last decade can reasonably claim to have bought through many players are Middlesborough and West Ham - both of which have largely been confined to the lower reaches of the PL (and at times to the Championship) and been severely financially restricted and Everton who the last criteria also applies to. I probably should add United to that list although recently the production line for their own team has slowed they could still point to a lot of PL players who have come through their system.

But making the observation that imo, Academys primarily exist to find players for the team the academy belongs too, by that measure you'd think utd like all top clubs have access to the best young 'potential' talent to put in their academy, with not very good results really as far as finding players good enough for THEIR OWN 1st team.

[Redspin]

Aren't all top acedemys in england though, that's the message here, and which has been the subject of many a conversation over recent weeks/months/years.

All of them throw up the odd player, maybe two or three big names, but none are consistently finding world class talent from their own doorstep. Even the amount of young foreign players and the cash spent on finding/getting them in doesn't produce consistent results it seems.

We spend more, so it should be logical to think we would find more young talented players that will make the top grade, but we don't seem to be any better than other countries, worse in fact according to reports.

And not just LFC either, it's across the premiership board, i would for instance, have expected utd to turn out more world class players from their academy, regularly. (and with manchester accents too).

One of the Sunday papers last weekend had an article about Chelsea's academy - in the debate about alleged tapping up of that French kid - which said that they'd spent £60m-odd on it in the past few years but the last player to make the breakthrough to be a regular first-teamer was John Terry, fully 11 years ago.

Ashley Cole was Arsenal's last major premier league player to come from their academy as a result of their English scouting network and who have Man U brought through from their academy to regular week-in week-out first team status since the days of Beckham etc? Fletcher? Not sure if he was scouted by them or signed from a Scottish club, but he hardly gets the pulse racing and is in no way a prominent figure in the world game, yet they're always praised for bringing young players through the system (who these mythical stars are defeats me)

But in any assessment of academy success or failure it always seems to be, out of the accepted Big 4 clubs, Liverpool's seeming failure to bring players through from their academy that the media latch on to. I wonder why that is?

[dww]

But making the observation that imo, Academys primarily exist to find players for the team the academy belongs too, by that measure you'd think utd like all top clubs have access to the best young 'potential' talent to put in their academy, with not very good results really as far as finding players good enough for THEIR OWN 1st team.

The FA however couldn't care less about that criteria (and rightly so IMO) they want as many homegrown players available to play at the PL (or other top European league) level. For example Shawcross left United but this summer was linked with a move to us - therefore if acadamies generate players good enough for the team who developed them to get money and who may finish their development into a top player elsewhere then that is a success for both the club on a sub-optimal level and on the only important level for the FA.

[Neil Young]

Why has Brooking got a knighthood?

I don't recall him ever playing for or managing Manchester United.

[S-RED]

Cos the Queen mum was a west ham fan........

[Neil Young]

Cos the Queen mum was a west ham fan........

Actually she was a dreadful, racist snob.

[Joe King]

Cos the Queen mum was a west ham fan........

I thought she was a Hertha Berlin fan

[Ben_Itez]

This summer, Jennings made his farewell speech to the clubs' owners and chief executives, imploring them to give academy youngsters more opportunities. In Europe, he says, players make first-team debuts at 21-22; here they are thrown into Carling Cup games or substitute appearances at an average of 18 years and four months, and judged critically on those performances. "Players are not afforded the chance to mature," he argues. "Reform is desperately needed for the 18-21 age group."

Rafa is obviously of this opinion and youngsters like Insua, Spearing, Darby etc have, and will be, gradually blooded and given the chance to be part of the first team squad playing with better players until they are 22 or so and hopefully will develop into decent squad players maybe more. You cant expect them to be pulling up trees at 18, that type of player is very rare, not many are going to be like Owen or Rooney at that age. David Silva, for example, has only made just over 100 appearances for Valencia and he's 23/24. He's obviously been given time to develop, in England he would probably have been discarded at 18 for being too small.

There is, startlingly, broad agreement among those who actually coach that clubs should not be signing boys as young as eight because their potential cannot be reliably assessed, and too much pressure and expectation is loaded on them at pre-teen ages. Children, most youth coaches accept, should be playing all sports recreationally, with the best coaching available, to develop all-round skills. Yet because football clubs need to stock academies beginning at Under-nine level, they are scouting children at six and even younger. Green cites the desperate instance, famed in youth football circles, of a four-year-old, scampering about in a Premier League club's development squad with a nappy clearly visible under his shorts.

That is absolutely insane.

Brian Jones, head of Aston Villa's academy, is scathing. "Aston Villa spend a fortune looking at boys from six years old onwards," he complains. "With the best will in the world I wouldn't know if a six, seven or eight year old is going to play in the Premier League in 10 or 12 years' time. It's ludicrous."

Couldnt agree more....kids shouldnt be aligned with a club until they are at least 12. Fair enough keep monitoring them but before then it's way too soon. Just let the kids play football for their local team....who knows they might even develop a bit of natural flair rather then be some homogenised drone.