I just dont see how it is fair to force the club to have two U21 players in the starting line-up. What if the U21's are not actually ready.
The best we can do is enforce roster rules and a rule that at least 3 U21 players should be part of the 18-man squad for match-days. Other than that I dont think we can enforce anything else otherwise the clubs would complain.
> Arsenalkid700 said:
> I just dont see how it is fair to force the club to have two U21 players in the starting line-up. What if the U21's are not actually ready.
The best we can do is enforce roster rules and a rule that at least 3 U21 players should be part of the 18-man squad for match-days. Other than that I dont think we can enforce anything else otherwise the clubs would complain.
they can loan players from other clubs....
ASSUME top half clubs are expected to have good youth systems and so have some decent u-21 players they could sent to bottom teams and so on... because being in squad is as good as unused as our coaches dont show confident in indian senior players so they wont show in youth unless it is compelled issue
@Arsenalkid700 Tats true but it right now one needs to have young players in the team so that the talent pool created over time is not lost. If U21 rule is stringent then U-23 seems to be a reasonable bet. The major point being with so much change in coaches, style of play and core of team being lost across seasons, arrows are no where near to the original goal of providing the future core of NT. Though many would argue Arrows have provided players like jeje, Alwyn, etc to NT in last few years, but we are missing the point that these guys are talented enough to become renounced players irrespective of arrows. They only needed a platform. Arrows gave it. But if AIFF had the rule of playing 1-2 U-21 players in matchday squad, these players would have definitely got the chance and would have reached the same status as that of now. Mediocre arrows players when moved out arrows struggled to get playing time and are lost in oblivion (baljit sahini,etc). So where is the core of team being retained? Few players have excelled and others are at same position as earlier. Same can be done with 1 U-21 player in each team (14 players in total). On contrary, we are losing a competitive club in league and also failing in clearing AFC licensing criteria.
> shankar said:
> > Arsenalkid700 said:
> > I just dont see how it is fair to force the club to have two U21 players in the starting line-up. What if the U21's are not actually ready.
The best we can do is enforce roster rules and a rule that at least 3 U21 players should be part of the 18-man squad for match-days. Other than that I dont think we can enforce anything else otherwise the clubs would complain.
>
>
they can loan players from other clubs....
ASSUME top half clubs are expected to have good youth systems and so have some decent u-21 players they could sent to bottom teams and so on... because being in squad is as good as unused as our coaches dont show confident in indian senior players so they wont show in youth unless it is compelled issue
That is already done by East Bengal and Pune FC. Dempo and Churchill Brothers use their state league.
Actually what I will propose though is something along the lines of these two leagues:
In which we take the best state league teams from across India. Put them in there own zones and also put in the U21 I-League teams as well. Have this be a proper league so the U21 players would get more games (and at least 3 over-23 players are allowed). I am planning on making a mini-model on what this could look like but it is not ready yet.
Just take a look at the two wikipedia pages and be amazing. This is almost like a different variation of what they do in Germany, Spain, and Portugal with the "B" teams in the league system.
> reddevil87 said:
> @Arsenalkid700 Tats true but it right now one needs to have young players in the team so that the talent pool created over time is not lost. If U21 rule is stringent then U-23 seems to be a reasonable bet. The major point being with so much change in coaches, style of play and core of team being lost across seasons, arrows are no where near to the original goal of providing the future core of NT. Though many would argue Arrows have provided players like jeje, Alwyn, etc to NT in last few years, but we are missing the point that these guys are talented enough to become renounced players irrespective of arrows. They only needed a platform. Arrows gave it. But if AIFF had the rule of playing 1-2 U-21 players in matchday squad, these players would have definitely got the chance and would have reached the same status as that of now. Mediocre arrows players when moved out arrows struggled to get playing time and are lost in oblivion (baljit sahini,etc). So where is the core of team being retained? Few players have excelled and others are at same position as earlier. Same can be done with 1 U-21 player in each team (14 players in total). On contrary, we are losing a competitive club in league and also failing in clearing AFC licensing criteria.
I understand that point but there is still many cons to the debate. For example, if we just reward U21 players the spot in the Starting XI will they really have "earned" the spot. They should prove that they are good enough to be in the starting XI. Also keep in mind that many youth football experts have said that it does matter how many times you play a player, if they are not developed the right way it does not matter, so just by playing 2 U21 players in the starting XI wont exactly make them "Asian-beaters".
Yeah I agree with the point. But we cant throw a club and place arrow only to ensurea right development of handful of potential talent. There are many other ways to do that. Right now except Pune no other clubs take care of the player development and the situation is not going to change in near future too. But, with AIFF academies we can atleast assume the players will have good nurture in their growing years, playing 1-2players in team will ensure their growth thereafter. Anyways, after 20 players develops majorly through game time.
> reddevil87 said:
> Yeah I agree with the point. But we cant throw a club and place arrow only to ensurea right development of handful of potential talent. There are many other ways to do that. Right now except Pune no other clubs take care of the player development and the situation is not going to change in near future too. But, with AIFF academies we can atleast assume the players will have good nurture in their growing years, playing 1-2players in team will ensure their growth thereafter. Anyways, after 20 players develops majorly through game time.
These are the names of all the U21 players who have played in the I-League this season. Note: When making this list I noticed that over 30 players aged 22-23 played so many games.
Thanks this enforces my point of 'having arrows is indeed futile' . Arrows is really a failed project in my opinion. It is high time that it should be shelved and instead allow a franchise/new club in i-league.
PS : last comment at end I meant, after age 20 players mainly develop through game time.
Listen @Shankar and @reddevil and everyone else. I think we can all agree right now that the major problem that led to the creation of Pailan Arrows is that there were not enough U21 players playing in the I-League. And we have now seen that Pailan Arrows has not exactly been the solution that we thought it would be. Players are brought only on loan, players are proven to not be ready for the I-League level yet, players are not disciplined yet, style of play is not pretty and bad for development, and coaches are not consistent. Also (in my opinion) the squad is way to big.
I however do not think that the new solution should be to disband Pailan Arrows and enforce a rule in which the clubs must play 2 U23 or U21 players in their starting XI. It takes away that feeling of "earning" your spot in the line-up which is a major part of development.
Now lets look at the youth development in India overall. If you look here:
You will see that we actually do have plenty of Under-21 players playing in the I-League this season. And also while making this list I noticed that many many players aged 22-23 play a lot as well.
What is the point of the list? Basically what you were proposing is already being done. Most teams are already playing U21 players on a regular basis. Churchill Brothers, our top club, regularly play Sanjay Balmuchu (21) and Bikramjit Singh (20) every game since January. East Bengal, our 2nd best club, plays Manandeep Singh (20) and Lalrindika Ralte (20) almost every game.
So the problem is not the fact that we do not have many U21 players here, the problem is how they are developed. So far, out of all 14 I-League clubs, only 1 has an Academy (Pune FC). So far that Academy has proven to be amazing for Pune FC. Winning the last 2 editions of the I-League U20. They even managed to beat out historic academies Tata Football Academy and SESA Football Academy. They are officially the best Academy in India.
Pune FC is an example to other clubs in India however none of them seem to be going in that direction. Mumbai disbanded one of their age groups this season. The Goan and Kolkata clubs do not have Academies (Mohun Bagan's fake Academy) and Shillong and Sikkim do not have real Academies.
Also we have to look at the aspects of youth football. Coaching, playing time, and discipline.
* Coaching: The coaching in India is horrible. Most coaches in India at youth and professional level still go with the old kick and run. And this is seen even at the Pune FC Academy and I-League. Yesterday I found the time to watch the Pune FC 2-2 Shillong Lajong match in full and what I saw was appalling. No skill, no composure, no proper thinking. Pune FC will pass the ball well from the defense to midfield like Barcelona but then all of a sudden turn they turn into Stoke City and lob the ball to the forwards (Jeje and James Moga) and then lose the ball. Shillong Lajong were worse. Just smash the ball up to the forwards. Edinho cant jump to save his life. So the coaching needs to change, starting at grassroots. We need to train coaches to play a better game. A game that rewards skill and athletic ability. A game that rewards composure on the ball and that supports smart play. That is the coaches job to teach the player. He can not do that then why even try.
* Playing time: Look at the I-League U20. Begins on 5 March 2013 and ends on 24 March 2013. 19 days. Two weeks and five days. WTF is this. In America we have a 10-month Academy schedule. In England they do to. In Australia they have a eight month season (5 in the NYL and 3 in the State Leagues). This needs to change. Pune FC have to send there Academy around India to find games. It would be better for them to just play in 1 simple league for U20 players.
* Discipline: Now this is not all bad. We do have football bad boys like Joey Barton, Neymar (kid), and Wayne Rooney but this is a different kind of discipline. What do the players eat? When do they eat it? How do they stay fit... in the offseason? During the Federation Cup we saw the defending I-League champions Dempo line-up against Pailan Arrows. Does anybody remember Mahesh Gawli in the picture. His belly. Is that the body of a footballer? No. What about Jewel Raja in the most recent poster? He is 23 and already looks like he eats a load of ice-cream after practice and games. This is something that needs to be taught at a very young age. And again something coaches should know as well.
So there you have it. The solution is not Pailan Arrows. The solution is not a rule forcing clubs to play U21 players.
The solution is for the AIFF to actually wake up and work on youth development and improve it.
Create a separate organization that deals with Youth Football in India. Enforce the I-League clubs to have Academies by 2015 at U20 and U17 levels. Create a better I-League U20 league that is 5-6 months long. Make sure to work with the best Academies that are not in the I-League like the Tata Football Academy, SESA Football Academy, Chandrigarh Football Academy, Quartz Academy, Namchi Sports Academy etc.
And also enforce new rules. Have each Academy be coached by a certified AIFF Academy Licensed Coach. And try getting the former players involved. Get them into coaching and other administrative positions.
It is a long process and will have bumps but it is possible.
Comments
I just dont see how it is fair to force the club to have two U21 players in the starting line-up. What if the U21's are not actually ready.
> Arsenalkid700 said:
> I just dont see how it is fair to force the club to have two U21 players in the starting line-up. What if the U21's are not actually ready.
@Arsenalkid700 Tats true but it right now one needs to have young players in the team so that the talent pool created over time is not lost. If U21 rule is stringent then U-23 seems to be a reasonable bet.
The major point being with so much change in coaches, style of play and core of team being lost across seasons, arrows are no where near to the original goal of providing the future core of NT. Though many would argue Arrows have provided players like jeje, Alwyn, etc to NT in last few years, but we are missing the point that these guys are talented enough to become renounced players irrespective of arrows. They only needed a platform. Arrows gave it. But if AIFF had the rule of playing 1-2 U-21 players in matchday squad, these players would have definitely got the chance and would have reached the same status as that of now. Mediocre arrows players when moved out arrows struggled to get playing time and are lost in oblivion (baljit sahini,etc). So where is the core of team being retained? Few players have excelled and others are at same position as earlier. Same can be done with 1 U-21 player in each team (14 players in total). On contrary, we are losing a competitive club in league and also failing in clearing AFC licensing criteria.
> shankar said:
> > Arsenalkid700 said:
> > I just dont see how it is fair to force the club to have two U21 players in the starting line-up. What if the U21's are not actually ready.
>
>
Just take a look at the two wikipedia pages and be amazing. This is almost like a different variation of what they do in Germany, Spain, and Portugal with the "B" teams in the league system.
> reddevil87 said:
> @Arsenalkid700 Tats true but it right now one needs to have young players in the team so that the talent pool created over time is not lost. If U21 rule is stringent then U-23 seems to be a reasonable bet.
The major point being with so much change in coaches, style of play and core of team being lost across seasons, arrows are no where near to the original goal of providing the future core of NT. Though many would argue Arrows have provided players like jeje, Alwyn, etc to NT in last few years, but we are missing the point that these guys are talented enough to become renounced players irrespective of arrows. They only needed a platform. Arrows gave it. But if AIFF had the rule of playing 1-2 U-21 players in matchday squad, these players would have definitely got the chance and would have reached the same status as that of now. Mediocre arrows players when moved out arrows struggled to get playing time and are lost in oblivion (baljit sahini,etc). So where is the core of team being retained? Few players have excelled and others are at same position as earlier. Same can be done with 1 U-21 player in each team (14 players in total). On contrary, we are losing a competitive club in league and also failing in clearing AFC licensing criteria.
Yeah I agree with the point. But we cant throw a club and place arrow only to ensure a right development of handful of potential talent. There are many other ways to do that. Right now except Pune no other clubs take care of the player development and the situation is not going to change in near future too. But, with AIFF academies we can atleast assume the players will have good nurture in their growing years, playing 1-2 players in team will ensure their growth thereafter. Anyways, after 20 players develops majorly through game time.
> reddevil87 said:
> Yeah I agree with the point. But we cant throw a club and place arrow only to ensure a right development of handful of potential talent. There are many other ways to do that. Right now except Pune no other clubs take care of the player development and the situation is not going to change in near future too. But, with AIFF academies we can atleast assume the players will have good nurture in their growing years, playing 1-2 players in team will ensure their growth thereafter. Anyways, after 20 players develops majorly through game time.
Thanks this enforces my point of 'having arrows is indeed futile' . Arrows is really a failed project in my opinion. It is high time that it should be shelved and instead allow a franchise/new club in i-league.
Listen @Shankar and @reddevil and everyone else. I think we can all agree right now that the major problem that led to the creation of Pailan Arrows is that there were not enough U21 players playing in the I-League. And we have now seen that Pailan Arrows has not exactly been the solution that we thought it would be. Players are brought only on loan, players are proven to not be ready for the I-League level yet, players are not disciplined yet, style of play is not pretty and bad for development, and coaches are not consistent. Also (in my opinion) the squad is way to big.
What is the point of the list? Basically what you were proposing is already being done. Most teams are already playing U21 players on a regular basis. Churchill Brothers, our top club, regularly play Sanjay Balmuchu (21) and Bikramjit Singh (20) every game since January. East Bengal, our 2nd best club, plays Manandeep Singh (20) and Lalrindika Ralte (20) almost every game.
This is what we should develop: