The FA's Response: Changing Attitudes?

It's almost like the FA read my last blog post on England. As I made my recommendation to start blooding the younger generation of English players, in order to maintain a more consistent approach in the future, the English governing body made its point. Greg Dyke, who has been a strong proponent of introducing further English quotas, has outlined his plan for the future of not only the Premier League, but the English national side.

If you want to read the full proposal, look here, but I'll just give you the highlights. The headline suggestion is that instead of the eight players currently required to be "home-grown", there will need to be 12, meaning that by 2020, the Premier League will be made up of a minimum 45 per cent of English players. There is also a change to the definition of "home-grown". Rather than the three years that a player must have been registered with the club before his 21st birthday, Dyke wants the three years to have been served before a player's 18th, ensuring that young talent continues to be nurtured by English clubs, instead of simply buying it in. Finally, he included a new requirement that two of these "home-grown' players must have been trained by their current club, meaning that all clubs have to place emphasis on their youth programmes.

So, should this come into operation today, how would this affect the current squads? Having looked at the sides registered by our top flight clubs after the September transfer window, I've outlined the amount of English players in each of their squads below:

Club	Players	Home grown (%)
Arsenal	8/23	35%
Aston Villa	16/25	64%
Burnley	18/24	75%
Chelsea	3/20	15%
Crystal Palace	15/25	60%
Everton	8/25	32%
Hull City	13/25	52%
Leicester City	17/24	71%
Liverpool	9/19	47%
Manchester City	8/24	33%
Manchester United	12/24	50%
Newcastle United	9/25	36%
Queens Park Rangers	19/25	76%
Southampton	9/20	45%
Stoke City	12/25	48%
Sunderland	12/21	57%
Swansea City	12/25	48%
Tottenham Hotspur	6/23	26%
West Bromwich Albion	10/23	43%
West Ham United	14/24	58%
Total	230/469	49%

Now, it's important to remember that this does not include the currently defined 'U-21s', who do not require registration. This may seem irrelevant, but it's worth noting that the likes of Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, Hector Bellerin and Harry Kane all fit into that bracket, and would all require registration under the new regulations. This may naturally boost the numbers of English players in the Premier League, but it's worth noting that there are only 11 of the 20 sides in the Premier League that would currently satisfy the proposals.

There is also a more significant trend. As we get further and further up the table, the percentage of English players gets less and less. The sides that would currently satisfy the new regulations sit in the following positions: 4th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th. With most of these sitting in the bottom half of the table, does this not just suggest that the best players (i.e. the ones that win titles) are not English?

With this not currently being the case, how do we breed the next generation of footballer, and even more so, encourage them to be successful? All of these new regulations may be completely irrelevant if our youth system does not produce the quality of English player we require to be competitive agains the likes of Spain, Germany and Brazil?

So maybe it's more pertinent to consider the national make-up of our youth sides, as this will give a better representation of the impact of these new regulations. As with the first team, I've listed the English contingent below:

Club	Players	Home grown (%)
Arsenal	16/22	73%
Aston Villa	13/18	72%
Burnley	17/27	62%
Chelsea	20/27	74%
Crystal Palace	17/17	100%
Everton	22/29	76%
Hull City	32/33	97%
Leicester City	15/21	71%
Liverpool	9/16	56%
Manchester City	14/29	48%
Manchester United	24/28	86%
Newcastle United	26/34	76%
Queens Park Rangers	7/14	50%
Southampton	15/19	79%
Stoke City	14/20	70%
Sunderland	22/30	73%
Swansea City	24/30	80%
Tottenham Hotspur	16/22	73%
West Bromwich Albion
West Ham United	16/24	67%
Total	339/438	77%

With the exception of West Brom, whose youth side I could not find, all bar Manchester City have youth sides with at least 50 per cent home grown players, giving rise to the hope that greater regulations around minimum English quotas will make a significant difference. This, coupled with the kind of investment that the likes of City are putting into their youth setups, shows that youth football has become a priority, and with English talent currently dominating the academies up and down the land, it looks like a positive step.

Another recent event that may significantly impact the way that our youth development works is the recent enormous rise in TV rights for the Premier League clubs. With clubs now set to receive a significant pay packet, there will be more to invest on our younger talent. However, the growth in funding for Premier League clubs inevitably inhibits the lower league sides from producing their own players. The likes of Wilfried Zaha, Scott Sinclair and Will Hughes, who came through the Championship youth system are likely to become less and less frequent, as the bigger clubs continue to steal the best talent. Though the Premier League points to the £1bn that the lower league clubs will share from 2016, it is worth pointing out that despite a rise of 70 per cent in overall TV rights fees, the lower leagues have only seen a 30 per cent rise in their cut - maybe not so generous after all?

However, will these make any significant difference to the national team? Or even the performance of our clubs in Europe, as outlined in my previous article? Well, in terms of the national team, it will inevitably help us produce a greater calibre of player, and more consistently. However, it is perhaps our own arrogance that makes us believe that we are in the same bracket as Spain and Germany when it comes to creating players. We are typically impatient, meaning that players are not given the chance to develop when it comes to the national team, and often to their downfall.

Ultimately, we need to accept that we are not good enough when it comes to football. We may have created the game, but we are no longer the kings of it. As a result, just 23 English players played Champions League football last year, compared to 76 from Spain, 51 from Germany and 55 from Brazil. We would be naive to think that we can change that substantially overnight, but it is certainly true that we can bolster those numbers, so perhaps a quota of English players is a good first step.

But now I'm going to be facetious and use a political argument (the election is just a matter of weeks away!). Can you imagine any other industry in the country proposing this? And further still, it being widely accepted? If I turned round and made a public comment that 'XX sector should reserve 50 per cent of English jobs for English people', I'd be signed up to the BNP and ostracised by practically everyone else! But chuck in a ball and a net, and people are falling over one another to support what may otherwise be branded as racist and discriminatory!

Ok, back to the serious argument. I do support the ideas to an extent, though I do suspect it will have a negative impact on the quality of the Premier League. However, this may not be a bad thing when it comes to competing in Europe. Let me explain why. A lower quality Premier League means lower TV rights and prize money for domestic competition. As I mentioned in my earlier post, it is this financial disparity between the Premier League and the Champions League that may have a detrimental impact on the performance of English sides, even if only subconsciously. This proposal may make Europe a larger priority, and we may at last return to seeing English clubs in the latter stages.

This argument is strengthened by the announcement made by UEFA last week. Clearly Michel Platini had been reading my blog too (or so I'd like to think!), as both of the major competitions in have raised their prize money for competitors. For the Champions League sides, all will now share £872m - up from £696m - or an average of £8.7m each, which represents a 38 per cent increase. In the Europa League, it is an even bigger jump, nearly doubling from £972,000 to £1.7m per team. With Europe offering a larger financial reward, and the potential for the domestic game to lower its rewards, could we begin to see a greater emphasis placed on these competitions?

In terms of the national side, I think there is a better alternative to the quotas. In most of the top European nations, leading sides are allowed to submit 'B' teams, who compete at a slightly lower level. These are not like reserve team games, as they are extremely competitive and against teams that are seeking promotion, and offer younger players some game time in conditions similar to those of the normal team. This has seen the likes of Xavi and Iniesta come through the ranks at Barcelona, and was part of the reason for the recent success of the German national side. As such, I would look to implement such as system in England, possibly around Conference level.

The ideas presented by Greg Dyke are not bad ones, and certainly have their advantages when it comes to European competition, but if we're expecting us to take the world stage by storm in the next few years, then we're deluded. It will be a long, slow process to take England back towards the top, but maybe this is a good first step.

England's Future: Should We Prepare For Success?

                        As the Premier League season takes a break for international qualifiers, our attention has turned to the national side. With World Cup 2014 qualifiers this weekend against Moldova and Ukraine, there has been much discussion over what our expectations should be for present and future tournaments. English football in recent years has, in general, been burdened with a ridiculously heightened set of expectations. Every pre-tournament begins with a select group of fans insisting that 'this will be our year'. And it never has been.

                        The subject has reared its head once again with the new FA Chairman Greg Dyke making his first official speech in his new capacity. Having been appointed as David Bernstein's successor in March, beginning his new role in July, the 66 year old has been making headlines in recent days. Yesterday, the news broke that Dyke expects England to be capable of reaching the Euro 2020 semi finals, and then potentially win the 2022 World Cup in Qatar. In this post, I will be examining just how realistic this statement is, and giving my opinions on England's chances over the next decade or so.

                          A good place to start when examining this statement is to look at England's historical performances in tournaments. If Dyke's comments are to be believed, then an upward trend, no matter how small, should be expected in order to see a progression towards the later stages of competitions. This would give evidence for such optimism. I will go back to my earliest memories of England, to see if we have progressed since the mid-90s. Euro 96' was obviously a massive competition for the nation, as it was the first time since 1966 that England had hosted an international tournament. With the home crowd urging their side on, England progressed to the semi finals of a major tournament. There they faced the pre-tournament favourites Germany, and after 120 minutes the two could not be separated. In a repeat of the famous 1990 World Cup semi, England were to lose on penalties, with Gareth Southgate the man to shoulder the responsibility. This penalty shootout would start an alarming pattern of spot-kick exits. In 1998, England made the short journey to France for the World Cup. After getting through the groups, they met Argentina in the knock-out round. This game will best be remembered for the emergence of Michael Owen, who at 18 scored a wondergoal, and then the dismissal of David Beckham, for a retaliatory kick on Diego Simeone. These events would lead to another penalty shootout, with David Batty the unfortunate individual this time around.

                            In 2000, England were placed in a 'Group of Death' with Germany, Portugal and Romania. Having lost their opening game by the narrowest of margins to the Portuguese, the English gained revenge over their great rivals Germany, meaning a final game showdown with the Romanians. There, despite leading 2-1 at half time, England let that slip, eventually losing 3-2 to exit the tournament at the group stage. The Japan/South Korea World Cup of 2002 saw the English once again placed in the toughest group, with Sweden, Nigeria and Argentina their opponents. After drawing their opening game, the English claimed revenge for their 1998 defeat to Argentina, with Beckham redeeming himself with the winning goal from the spot. Another draw with Nigeria saw the English scrape through in second place, where they met Denmark. There they cruised through, winning 3-0 to face Brazil in the quarter final. With many saying that the winner would come from this match, England raced into a lead, with Owen opening the scoring mid-way through the half. But once again they conspired to lose, with goals from Rivaldo and a freak free-kick from Ronaldinho knocking the English out. Euro 2004 saw the return of the penalty kick exit. After progressing through the groups relatively easily, England faced hosts Portugal in the quarters. After taking the lead, the English lost prodigy Wayne Rooney to a broken metatarsal, before Portugal fought back to take the match to penalties. There, misses from Darius Vassell and, most spectacularly, from David Beckham condemned England to another exit.

                               Germany hosted the 2006 World Cup, and after a comfortable journey through the group, England edged past Ecuador thanks to a Beckham free-kick. The quarter-finals saw the English up against Portugal, and after a controversial red card to Rooney, with Cristiano Ronaldo the villain, England once again exited on penalties. After misses from Lampard, Gerrard and Carragher, it was over to Ronaldo to deal the final blow. Two years later, after a dismal campaign under manager Steve McLaren, England lost 3-2 to Croatia in their final qualifying game to deny them a place in Austria-Switzerland. Fabio Capello's England managed to qualify for South Africa 2010 without losing, but they struggled to get out of the easiest group in the competition. After dismal draws against the USA and Algeria, they laboured to a 1-0 win against Slovenia. The knockout round saw them face the Germans, where they were destroyed 4-1. Most recently, last summer saw the English side travel to Poland-Ukraine, where after cruising through the group, they met a strong Italian outfit in the quarters. After 120 minutes of stalemate, it was once again down to the lottery of a penalty shootout. There, misses from Young and Cole sent England packing. In none of the last seven tournaments have England progressed past the quarter finals. Rather than the upward trend that would support the claims, it has been almost the exact opposite, so Dyke's comments that he expects England to win the 2022 World Cup seem completely against historical evidence.

                                   But maybe I am being pessimistic on our young and upcoming players. Perhaps we have in our youth ranks the next Lionel Messi, who will lead England to stardom and success. If these prospects are what Dyke is basing his claims on, it is therefore worth looking at England's up and coming talent. If we discard those players that are over the 30 year old mark, England's next team will roughly consist of: Hart, Baines, Jones, Cahill, Walker, Wilshere, Walcott, Oxlade-Chamberlain, Cleverley, Welbeck, Rooney. Whilst an above average team, I would not consider this side capable of winning major international honours, especially when compared with the Spanish and the Brazilians. In terms of the youth prospects, players like Ross Barkley and Nathan Redmond have started this new season well, but they are hardly likely to push England to the international victory that is being suggested. The longer-term future prospects are not much better either, as the grassroots game has all too often been criticised for not bringing the players through. Dyke's argument seems to assume that we are now at as good if not a better position than the 'Golden Era' of 2002-2006. This is backed up by his recent comments that an English World Cup win in 2014 is 'unlikely'. The very fact that we are thinking about it seems deluded, as we do not have the history or the squad to support these claims.

                                       The final reason why I believe Dyke's claim of England's chances of victory in 2022 is ridiculous is a simple one: it takes place in Qatar. There has already been a great deal of controversy over whether a summer World Cup in the Middle East country is possible, with temperatures of up to 50C expected. It is no coincidence that England tend to do badly in countries with a high temperature. South Africa 2010 is a good example of this, and I expect to see another example next summer. Sides that are used to the Middle Eastern climate will benefit from the 2022 World Cup, unless the switch to a winter World Cup occurs. I disagree with the idea, but it would level the playing field somewhat. The climate alone would ordinarily be enough to leave England at a disadvantage, and I suspect that that is what we will see in 2022.

                                          So how can we rectify this situation? I think we have to start from square one, go right back to basics and make revolutionary changes to the grassroots of our game. Having considerable experience of youth football, having been a player, and later, a referee, I know all too well the problems that young players face. Even from a very young age, technical ability and training is bred out of players, replaced by the desire to win at all costs. This leaves current players with an exceptionally bad attitude, to both referees and managers, and lacking in the technical ability to move to the next level. This is not aided by the way that I have observed families behave on the touchlines of matches. In my refereeing days, I genuinely enjoyed the matches, and the kids in general were well-behaved. You at times got the odd one that would mouth off, but the majority were respectful. The parents, on the other hand, were disgraceful. The abuse and language that I as the referee, the opposing players, and even their own children would recieve was horrendous, and it made me despair of parenting in this country. It is not difficult to see how players pick up those disrespectful habits, and this, coupled with the lack of training, is precisely why English players are not as successful. For those who complain that we do not see enough English transfers, this is simply because we want to be the best league in the world, and those who blame this on the national side's failure start the blaming process too late in the players' development.

                                              I think we have to adopt a much more Spanish or German approach, with the emphasis on training and nurturing, rather than the victory-based emphasis on resentment and anger that currently exists. We have to do this from the very earliest age, with any talent encouraged and technique valued over victory. Parents forget that their children are not fighting for £50,000 a week and 3 points in the Premier League, and they need to calm down. I would happily hand out lifetime bans for misbehaviour at football grounds and school fields. That may appear harsh, but some of what I have witnessed and been subjected to from parents is astonishing and disgusting, and I would never want any referee (bear in mind I was only 14 at the time) going through that. We see this happen all too often in the Premier League (the Respect campaign is, in my opinion, a joke), and children and parents are inevitably going to continue this. Stamping it out, like we have seen with racism, is the only way we are going to improve.

                                               As for the English game and their chances, I think that Dyke appears to be one of those England supporters that goes into every tournament with a sense of optimism about England's chances. I, for one would like to hear some refreshing honesty from the upper echelons of the FA for once. Saying things like 'we should expect to win the World Cup in 2022' is at best laughable, as I see no reason why the slump we have become so accustomed to will not continue. It is perhaps best to accept that England as a footballing nation are no better than a quarter final place at major tournaments. That way we won't have to feel the disappointment and anger at our players when we lose on penalties to Portugal. Without an overhaul of our mentality at the grassroots level, both in terms of training and anger management, I fail to see England winning anything for a long time.