Academy restructuring - set to become the norm?

"The Club has been forced to rethink the way it develops young players as a consequence of the impact of the Elite Player Performance Plan (EPPP) system."

This was the line from Tranmere Rovers FC following the unfortunate news that the club were set to, essentially, close down their youth academy. 

Tranmere have been in the Conference now for a couple of seasons. With a full time academy (and various other ventures that they are leading the way in), this was eventually going to be an area that they had to scale down should they not get back into the football league in the near future. 

This will have been tough on the many players in their academy that may not be so lucky to find another professional club. Tranmere have acknowledged themselves that and will try to assist them in finding new clubs but not all will be able to. Equally, I imagine many will have lost jobs and roles and have to find themselves new environments to work and coach in. 

However, Tranmere are not the first side to come to this conclusion following the impacts of EPPP. Wycombe, Brentford and more recently Huddersfield have all restructured in some form. 

Jason Koumas - a success story of
 Tranmere's academy in the past

All four of those clubs have produced a good standard of player from their academies. In days gone by, Tranmere have profited from the sales of Jason Koumas (£2.5m), Ryan Taylor (£750k), Ian Nolan (£2m), Clint Hill (£250k) who they had produced in their academy set ups which will have surely helped with the running of the club, let alone the academy. Due to the current system, Tranmere are now losing players for free at the younger age groups where they may previously have been able to hold onto players. 

These are not decisions that clubs are taking lightly. 

Brentford were well regarded in the competitive environment that is the London academy scene, with Miguel Rios, Kevin O'Connor and Ose Aibangee known figures for their good work at the club who were thriving in the Championship. 

Huddersfield cited their frustration at the lack of local players coming through to their first team. A startling fact in the BT 'No Hunger in Paradise' documentary revealed that Manchester City had more scouts in Huddersfield than Huddersfield themselves. They clearly did not feel the academy was value for money, despite having one U15 that was in the England youth squads and has since signed for Manchester United.  

"Running our academy in its current format (U8s to U18s) costs in excess of £300,000 a season and over the last two years we have lost over £500,000 of central funding for academy operations. 
  

Prior to the introduction of the EPPP system, the income from player sales offset some or all of the cost, and Tranmere had some notable success in developing and selling players." 

Tranmere's academy operated in, like Brentford, Wycombe and Huddersfield, a very competitive environment. They are probably used to losing out on players, but also probably made some good money previously for players that they lost to clubs around them. With EPPP making it easier for clubs in the higher categories to sign players from further away, this only compounds this issue. 

In terms of developing players, Tranmere are now going to focus their efforts on a 16+ development team. This may have come off of the back of Brentford's success in this area, as they now have more freedom to play against different types of opposition and focus their efforts on one group of players. You would imagine that this is more financially viable for them too, as well as still offering high levels of coaching in 'centre of excellences' at "affordable prices" for players in the local area. 

What will not be cut is the Futsal academy, contrary to reports earlier in the week. Tranmere have been a real leader in this area and are helping to develop Futsal in England as it continues to become ever more popular. They have received lots of praise for how they promote Futsal and also have an international coaching scheme, where the have coaches in China. 

I also found this statement interesting too: 

"Change is never comfortable but football has changed and we have to react and redefine our academy operation order, to protect the Club and to benefit those in our community."

Again, this is something similar to Brentford in being able to offer more to the community. Money that they may feel was wasted towards their academy programme may go to better use in creating more inclusive communities. Tranmere have announced several things that they are going to do with schools and grassroots football, which I commend them on.

One of the major criticisms (and I believe this too) of professional clubs is the lack of work or partnerships with grassroots clubs. I have mentioned this before, but Ajax work with over forty clubs in their local area, working with them to develop players and importantly, coaches! 

There is so much work we can do that could help raise the standard of coaching, not only to develop players but offer more opportunities for young children to be physically active and feel part of their local community. 

Tranmere feel that they expect more clubs to follow suit and it is hard to argue with this. 

EPPP serves a purpose, that being benefitting those at the top of the tree but much like in wider society this does not trickle to those lower down. Why not reject EPPP if this is the case? 

Ultimately, clubs outside of that inner circle may have no other choice.

You can read the story from Tranmere here. I'd certainly be interested to hear people's views on this!

Expected goals, expected scepticism...

As Jeff Stelling fumed about Arsene Wenger citing expected goals post-match (what does he even know, anyway?), his Soccer Saturday cronies laughed in the background. 'Yeah, you tell 'em Jeff!'

It is not the first outdated rant that a member of the Soccer Saturday team has made, as poor Marco Silva will tell you.

It is no surprise that these 'Football Men', as they often referred as within the game, are as usual off the mark with a new approach within football. I would guess that it threatens their own positions, as they begin to look more and more outdated. 

It is also not surprising that he had absolutely no idea what expected goals really is, as many who dismiss it as pointless do. 

A rant like Stelling's about expected goals is a dangerous one however within football because it will have been lapped up but unsuspecting fans, players and coaches who also have no idea what expected goals, or 'xG' as it can be known, even is. As a result, they will themselves be dismissive as it's a load of nonsense according to good old, lovable Jeff. 

Jeff rants about xG, Marco Silva and
 how football was better in his day

But if you dig a little deeper the whole concept of expected goals is very interesting and above all, useful. How many times have you been discussing a game you've just watched, particularly as a fan of one of the teams, bemoaning the missed chances that have impacted the outcome of the game?

Expected goals actually helps us work out if that is true or not. It is a metric that quantifies the likelihood of an effort on goal actually being scored through an algorithm.

Why should fans care? Well, they don't have to, and they probably don't, but when someone is bemoaning a team's fortunes such 'on another day that shot goes in' or 'we were unlucky' you can actually go a long way to proving it to be true or not.

xG has come to prominence somewhat more as it has started to appear on MOTD (after the corner statistic flashes for each game, how sad am I?) since the start of the 2017-18 season. For anoraks like me, it's really cool that something like this is being embraced in the mainstream media. It is something I think will quickly become the norm amongst football fans in the coming years.

For coaching, scouting and analysis, it is just one of many developments in football analytics. Any team who outwardly promotes their use of analytics is labelled as using 'moneyball', which I think again shows that there is a long way to overcoming the dismissive nature of football towards stats!

A metric like expected goals can be huge for departments across a club. Coaches can assess where they might need to work with a striker, in terms of their finishing or the positions they pick up. Analysts can identify exactly that for them. Scouts can back up subjective attitudes towards a player with objective data like this. If a player truly does pick up good positions but just isn't scoring them yet 'xG' will help identify this, making the recruitment process a whole lot more efficient.

I am by no means an expert on this area, far from it (!) but I do recognise it's significance and how it could aid my own coaching in football if I wish to pursue it at a higher level one day.

As analytics becomes more sophisticated it is slowly being dripped into youth development in the professional game - which can only be a good thing. The more objective we can become to supplement that alongside the more subjective information and ideas we have about players the more informed decisions can be made about young players and their future. Too often, decisions on young players are made on a whim because of a personal opinion from one coach, which may not be representative of that club as a whole. 

In terms of grassroots football, it may not have as much significance due to the nature of the game at that level with various constraints that would not really allow for it, not least of all; time. But just by educating players, or coaches, they can start to think a little more objectively about things rather than relying on their own confirmation bias.

The dismissal of expected goals as a metric by the more old-school thinkers is a strange one, but as I said above not surprising. Statistics, especially the interesting ones, possibly threaten this type of individual's 'traditions' and 'values' and maybe they worry will be rendered useless as modern football develops. Those who embrace it however, will find the benefits. What is to lose anyway?

Though the 'Football Men' may not like it, expected goals is here to stay and is slowly becoming the norm. Furthermore, there will be many more useful statistics to come that will be far more meaningful than the original 'possession' that brought stats into play in football. Analytics is developing in football into something very meaningful, so think before you dismiss it without even understanding it!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To learn more about expected goals and analytics in football, here are some interesting articles!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40699431 - BBC article

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2017/nov/22/jeff-stelling-expected-goals-stats-xg-soccer-am - Guardian article

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLcXH_4rwr4 - FourFourTwo documentary

https://experimental361.com/ - Very good website that breaks it down

https://statsbomb.com/2013/08/goal-expectation-and-efficiency/ - Goal expectation and efficiency

Youth football: Where do we draw the line?

This blog post is inspired from reading Michael Calvin's latest brilliant book 'No Hunger in Paradise'.

The book does a fantastic job of capturing youth football and its realities within the professional game. At times it is heart-warming, at others it makes you despair.

And while reading it, it reminded me of everything that is wrong in youth and grassroots football.

Four, five, six year old boys are sold the dream. They are invited to 'academy development centres', promised contracts once they turn eight, their heads are filled with ideas of the riches that come with the game.

The reality is, barely any of these players will end up in the professional game as footballers. That is the cold reality. So why are these young people so unprepared for this? The percentages are tiny, minuscule. To be clear, I have never stopped a player progressing to an academy that I have coached, nor would I ever. It is a wonderful opportunity. Nevertheless, the reason I am so passionate about coaching in grassroots football is because although children do not all become professional footballers, they do all become members of society.

Do kids truly get to learn to love the game?

And inevitably, whether it be at eight, ten, twelve or as they approach the potential offers of scholarships, these players are discarded by their respective clubs. On a visit to AFC Ajax last September (blog here), their academy recognised that by releasing players, they are admitting that they have failed the players and that the coaches are not doing their own job.

I see similar parallels in grassroots youth football. Young children are released for not being 'good enough'. Firstly, good enough for what exactly? Secondly, why do they need to be good enough? The very definition of grassroots football is the introduction to and enjoyment of the sport.

How do we change the ever growing commodification of academy footballers, though?

I firmly believe players shouldn't be registered with professional club until fourteen years of age, but we know that this is never going to happen, nor is it practical. Clubs find loopholes round the fact that clubs are not allowed to sign players until they are eight as it is, as identified earlier in this article. An alternative might be that you can not release players on the grounds of ability until the age of fourteen. That way, you my get some degree of patience. For example, some players may struggle through a growth spurt (or a lack of one). Quite often clubs will get rid of a player like this whereas all they need is someone to give them the opportunity once their body settles down. I would be interested to hear people's thoughts on this!

Another cause for the concern in the growth of young players becoming commodities for clubs, if they are not already, is the presence of intermediaries. I find this abhorrent, simply put. As players approach sixteen they no doubt need some form of support in this area but surely that should come from the club providing education? That way we will get less players getting caught in a tug of war battle, incited by an 'agent' which would let them get on with their development with minimal distractions.

No doubt there are good agents about, as highlighted in Calvin's book, but does a nine year old really need an agent? There are too many people looking to milk the next superstar for everything they have and it is a stain on the game.

As players become shifted from club to club looking for the 'best' offer, this throws up many issues not just for the child as a footballer but as a person. Is this really what is best for the child?

It all came too soon for Sonny Pike

Clubs ask players to relocate at young ages to be near enough to the training ground - otherwise they may not be asked to stay on. I have witnessed parents share a genuine concern for having to move their child just to play for a professional club's academy at just ten years old. Equally, there are some parents who push their children too far. Taking them to clubs left, right and centre. Are they being given sufficient education on their child's welfare and what is truly best for their development as a player?

I am indeed aware that this is the 'nature of the beast' that is academy football and the professional game, but does that make it okay? Clubs are going above and beyond now, seemingly having no shame in the length they will go to sign a player. Two huge clubs now have been punished and yet it feels like we are only just scratching the surface here.

And finally, is it all a bit too much? Children can not cope with the same strains as adults, battering them year in year out, is it a dangerous game to be playing with their mental health, as well as physical? These players train up to four times a week plus a game. Will they be able to form a stable social life? Are they getting as much time to concentrate on other areas in their education? As I said, not every child can become a footballer.

I guess my question is, where do we draw the line? And are we currently crossing it?

It's all relative: birth bias in youth football

As a coach, have you ever considered your players' date of birth?

If the answer to that question is no, you may be missing a trick.

Concerning statistics reveal that a large proportion of youngsters in professional academies are born in the first three months of the selection year (i.e. September-November). This is also found to be prevalent in grassroots football where there is competition and a league structure.

The Relative Age Effect was highlighted in the mid eighties in elite youth ice hockey by Roger Barnsley. It was discovered that those that had been selected at elite level were born nearer the set selection date. The Relative Age Effect proposes that in the higher levels of sport, participation comes largely from those born in the first three months after an eligibility cut off date.

Just consider it.

Your star player in your under sevens side may be standing out currently but just remember, he or she may be up to eleven months older than another of your players. Someone who is seemingly dominant at the beginning of the season can easily be caught up. It's often a mistake that a coach, or scout or even parents can identify an individual's early physical maturation as 'talent'.

We could be overlooking a large amount of talented young players because of the opportunities given at a young age based on their date of birth.

Harry Kane - one of many of Spurs latest academy
graduates who are summer born!

It is very difficult to get into an academy set up past a certain age. If you aren't being watched from an early age and having exposure to the academy life (i.e. three training sessions a week) your chances slip away as time goes by. Some academies sign up to twenty five boys at under nines.

A theoretical model was put forward to suggest why this birth bias occurs. It considers that there are three social agents that affect the relative age effect; the parent, the coach and the athlete.

The theory behind how the coach can impact the relative age effect is called the pygmalion effect. It suggests that when an individual places greater expectation on someone then they will conform to that expectation. So if a coach perceives a young player to have high levels of ability for their physical maturity, it is possible that they are shaping that player's development with those expectation levels. Meanwhile, little Jane or Johnny are being further disadvantaged.

Ask yourself this, do you find yourself praising just the players who you see as the stars? Or can you manage the whole squad and meet their individual needs?

On the FA Youth Module 1 course, the relative age effect is indeed touched upon. If you own 'the future game' book published by the FA there is also a large section around it.  Through education, coaches can help themselves understand and limit the relative age effect.

How can this be further combatted? Is it just down to the coaches?

Since last year, academies have begun to trial "bio-banding". This is a process of grouping young players according by their physical maturity. Sports scientists are tasked to work out a young person's biological age for this process.

My issue with this is that considerations for the other three corners (technical, psychological, social) of the long term player development model might now be taken out of the equation.

In Nick Levett's article on the relative age effect, he mentions that although there are fewer late born players in academies, those players are given a fantastic education because of the challenges they face.

Lots of early maturers can also be talented!

Those challenges can help them become better learners, deal with being smaller physically and improve the other three areas while they mature physically. For the earlier born players who were once considered the big talent in their age group, they are given less of those challenge and may not be asked to maintain as high a standard as the others. I have definitely seen that happen to players at a local professional club where I grew up. It works both ways!

West Brom have a late birthday project and Tottenham have shadow squads throughout their younger ages. It certainly is not something that has been ignored.

A key concern of mine is towards grassroots football and participation. Where there is less competition and in non-elite sport the relative age effect is found to be reduced. However, managements, coaches and parents are far less likely to have received the education on the matter to assist in reducing birth bias. It is entirely possible that in physical sports such as football less developed children will be out off by the demands, and also being perceived as having low levels of ability. Can this be considered a form of social exclusion?

I welcome your views surrounding the Relative Age Effect, and the possible ways you or your club may be looking to combat this phenomenon!

Why English Football needs the Rooney Rule

"There is a hidden resistance."

The words of Gordon Taylor, chief executive of the professional footballers' association, on the lack of black and ethnic minority coaches in english football.

The debate around the 'Rooney Rule', a rule that was initially implemented in the NFL in 2003, has been a subject of much debate in England in recent years. 

Will Chris Ramsey find it difficult
to find another managerial role?

While the debate rattles on, the stats do not improve. Only this month Chris Powell and Chris Ramsey were sacked in the same day by Huddersfield Town and Queens Park Rangers respectively. This reduced the number of black asian and ethnic minority head coaches by a third, to just four in the professional leagues. The timing of these two sackings was rather unfortunate, but while around 25% percent of players are black asian and ethnic minority males they make up under 4% of professional coaches. 

Surely that evidences that for whatever the reason be there is a problem in english football? 

And even for those who consider a rule that supports representation to be 'positive discrimination', it would also address the serious issue of the hiring and firing rate that football currently has. 

Nineteen managers in the football league have already been sacked, meaning nearly a fifth of the clubs have already experienced a managerial change. And there will be more, plenty more. 

The problem that must really be tackled though is the lack of a systematic process for appointing a head coach or manager. If a practice was implemented where clubs were asked to interview black and ethnic minority candidate, it would actually be urging the club to actually stop and think about a major decision at a large organisation.

These decisions affect a huge amount of people and I think that can be easily overlooked.

Gary Bowyer the latest casualty of the ridiculous
hiring and firing nature of English football

A massive misconception of the Rooney Rule is that it is a quota. It simply asks that a QUALIFIED candidate from a black and ethnic minority candidate is INTERVIEWED. Not hired - interviewed. 

Such a rule would mean all clubs would be required to have a professional, thought out interview process. This is clearly not the case at many clubs. How often do you see clubs sack a manager, only to replace them a day later? While this might be seen as forward planning, it also blocks the opportunity for promising coaches to apply and make their case in front of chairmen of football clubs.

And for those that are still against the idea and think that the issue is non-existent, a transparent process such as this one would surely, if they are right, prove that there is not a problem of discrimination?

But as long as managers such as Dean Saunders (three relegations in his last three jobs) and Neil Warnock continue to be offered jobs based on after dinner speeches and who they play golf with, you are going to find it difficult to convince me that this is not a pressing issue. 

I look forward to hearing the thoughts of those who have an opinion on the matter. Please feel free to comment below if you would like to debate the matter further!

Central venue leagues: the way forward for grassroots football?

Starting up a grassroots football club is difficult (and then running it is pretty tough too!). There are so many considerations to take into account such as; insurance, affiliation, attracting players and finding volunteers amongst many.

Another challenge is finding a suitable home venue. One where a club can provide a pitch for all it's teams if required on one day. In the modern day it is rather difficult to find that kind of space and furthermore, if such a place exists it is unlikely that one club can have access to all the pitches just for themselves.

Hackney Marshes was - and still is - a great venue for football

So when the grassroots club that I work with in London looked to address this problem, a league in East London provided the solution. All games in this league were held at one venue with the pitch and referee part of the package.

For clubs who struggle with the logistics of arranging home and away matches at the weekend, this eradicates that issue completely. And for those who do not have a coach per age group, it allows them to travel from game to game with relative ease.

This year I have been coaching with an under sevens side in the Southampton area. The league they are in have a similar system but play the games on an astro turf pitch. They are able to run three games simultaneously, with each game filling roughly an hour slot. This runs most of the day on the Sunday so it allows plenty of teams to play football on a quality surface where games are also significantly less likely to be called off. And what's more, there is a great atmosphere about the place (below is a picture of the first thing you see when you arrive).

A great sign to see entering the pitches
in a youth league in Southampton

If this became a more common system across the country it could become a real positive for scouts and people working in talent identification. I mentioned in a previous blog that scouts appear more prominently at summer tournaments and I would imagine this is because they have access to more players in one place, saving them valuable time and money.  At central venue leagues this would be of a similar advantage for them to witness young players in a competitive, realistic environment during the season.

With the Football Association planning to create one hundred additional astro turf pitches over the next four years, when organisations and football clubs look to secure funding for these pitches a case for their proposal could be to have a grassroots youth league playing their on the weekend. This would provide evidence for it being financially sustainable, in addition to the potential stream of money that would come from the hundreds of people that will be there who may want to buy tea, coffee, hot food etc.

I hope that this can become a more common sight. I have seen so many stories of clubs having to fold and this could be one mechanism that can help to reduce that occuring so often. There is a real possibility I believe for creating a system that can be easily organised nation wide which would begin to improve and bring together the grassroots football community!

Are football fans addicted to transfers?

It is safe to say that money has become a rather important factor in football. Little else sums up contemporary football better than how much money there is in the sport. Logic suggests that with more money than other clubs, you increase your chances of tempting their talented footballers to yours. In addition, with more money being offered, the selling club can happily profit from or reinvest the transfer fees they receive for those players. This is not always the case of course but the general feeling is that with enough finance, clubs can get the man they want.

For whatever reason yellow is the theme of transfer deadline day

Young players are able to demand transfers, in the tender years of their careers, in order to force a move to more successful clubs. Those clubs can hoover up the best talent from across the country (with the help of EPPP - for another time), because the initial money they spend is pocket changes to them. And we lap it all up. 

Football is evermore becoming a ruthless business, with the fans baying for blood when results are not how they would like them to be. There is a desire to compete at the highest level by clubs and their fans, for differing reasons, in equal proportion. For the clubs themselves, the revenue and broadcasting rights (in England in particular) bring untold riches. The gap between the richest and the poorer clubs is increasing year after year and if clubs do not act quickly and smartly, they will be the ones left behind. For the fans, Champions League football has developed into the pinnacle of elite football, the holy grail you might say. Unless you support clubs who play in the elite competitions your view is worth less than others. Fans of lower league clubs might even now have a 'second team', one that is successful and have easy access to via TV or the internet.

And the simple solution to improving a team, or increasing their chances of winning, is seen as signing new players. 'Fresh blood', 'competition for places'. It is an easy thing to suggest, and easy for the head coach,  rather than actually doing their job than improving the players they have at their disposal (Harry Redknapp, I'm looking at you). And with this culture of the 'armchair expert', such is the amount of football fans can access nowadays, it is simpler to suggest new players than how the team can improve individually and collectively, on the training ground. After one signing is made attention can immediately turn to another position in the team that needs 'strengthening'. And this leads to the question I ask in this blog: are football fans addicted to transfers?

Such is the hype around transfers that adults will unashamedly admit to booking a day off work for the final day of the transfer window so that they can slouch on sofa, eagerly anticipating whichever bizarre way Jim White chooses to announce himself to the Sky studios with his bright yellow tie for all to see. White can be thankful to the career boost from the fanfare around transfers as he has become something of a cult hero, presenting as the face of transfer deadline day.

A transfer deadline day "classic"

What is it about making new signings that the fans just love? A club rarely makes outstanding signings 100% of the time, with no guarantee on the outcome of any deal. Regardless, it is greeted as a sign of ambition, and that is important to many within the game. Some signings can be just as much about of being seen to mean business than even improving the first team.

Could it be argued that in England this thirst for fresh faces affects the development of our home grown talent? Not in the typically argued 'them bloody foreigners' way but that, in general, if a club feels the need to continuously replenish their playing staff, how on earth can young players stake their claim for a first team place? Without that initial opportunity, how can we know whether we are producing the talent that we are told is not being developed after every international tournament failure?

Not that signing new players is bad, far from it. A good signing can dramatically improved a team's performances and have a positive effect. However there are just as many cases were deals are seen as 'flops' that have blocked off the chance for someone else, already at the club, to step up and show their worth.

I'm not sure how the amount of players that are brought into a club within one window can be slowed down, or if it ever will! Whether there are too many transfers between clubs, and too much money thrown around, is all very subjective anyway. A more cautious approach by any club would be met with riots! With the impact social media now has news travels at incredible speed, fans are desperate to be the first to find out and stay in the loop, and that shows no signs of slowing either.

The nowhere men who make a hash of matters

Talent identification in football, particularly at youth level, has risen in its importance for professional clubs. More money is being spent on the running of academy set ups than ever before with clubs identifying the need to produce the next top talent. Clubs are now competing vociferously with each other to be the first to snap up young potential, with development centres being set up for players as young as four or five.  The Elite Player Performance Plan allows “clubs that have earned a top category grading to recruit young talent from further afield than is permitted under the current rules”. Thus meaning that more clubs can scout in more areas, giving players more opportunities to be observed by more staff at more professional football clubs.

Is there a science behind talent identification?

The Football Association themselves are recognising the need for education on the matter of talent identification, in the process of developing the Level 1 certificate in Talent Identification. Former FA head of talent identification Mike Rigg insisted that “our talent ID process must move beyond the snapshot mentality," but with the demand and pressure to not miss out on the 'next big thing', scouts could be too worried to take their time watching a player when another club may take the chance on them straight away.

Developing the players I work with as a human being and as a footballer are always the key when I remember why I love coaching football. Therefore, when I am approached by a scout about a player in the team I am working with I am naturally delighted, knowing that I am doing a part of my job well and mainly, excited for the child identified.

What irks me, however, is when a scout does not feel the need to talk with the coach (whether it be me or someone else) and makes advances towards the child and their parents without anyone’s permission. As far as I am aware there is a certain procedure scouts are asked to follow, which involves the coach introducing the scout to the child’s parent. This was not the case earlier this year at a tournament I coached an under tens team at.

On this occasion the scout had indeed approached me and told me that he liked the look of one of my players. He added that he would come back and swap contact details so he could come see more of him, but when I next looked around he was already deep in discussion with the child and mother. I knew a scout at the same club already and found out that this person was in fact a scout coordinator! I would never block an opportunity for a young player, and he will be training with that club soon but we have received an apology too.

Worryingly accurate

In another case, just weeks previously, a supposed head of recruitment at a different club contacted a parent of another eleven year old at our club. We have taken this boy to two professional clubs already because of his obvious talent and we expected him to attract more attention. This time we had not received any notification whatsoever of their interest in taking the child in question on trial from the club. 

My primary concern here (lack of communication between grassroots and elite is for another day) is that these people are strangers first, employees at a professional football club second. We do not know these people and for all we know they could be anyone. There are so many children out there who dream of one day becoming a professional footballer which makes them so vulnerable to people who may or not work for a professional football club. I need to know these people are the real deal before we get to the stage of introducing and talking about a potential trial. Quite often a scout will approach me and fail to show me any form of identification that evidences that they are who they say they are. Leading me onto my next point. 

Secondly, the unprofessional-ism of not one but two football clubs is disturbing. These people are representing an organisation when they approach people, so they must act in a way that shows that organisation to be a respectful and thoughtful one. If there is a procedure they need to follow it strictly. If there is not then one should be implemented. It is very easy for scouts to wear a club tracksuit and show off who they work for but anyone can do that. When wearing old kit from my team (associated with a professional club) I played for at sixth form, children ask me if I am a scout, to which I politely tell them I am not. It used to be the scouts tried to stay out of the spotlight (hence the nickname 'the nowhere men'), now young men relish the attention!

I appreciate that talent identification courses are in their infancy and an effort is being made but clubs must strive to hold higher standards.  They can do so much more without a fuss to create a more stable environment for young players to be identified in the correct manner. I do not know if other grassroots coaches have similar experiences (please feel free to share if you have in the comments section) but these are people who hold important roles in the development of footballers in this country and leaves me apprehensive about the state of our talent identification system. I am hopeful with that more education for those working in the professional game will ease my fears but I believe that this needs to happen sooner rather than later.