If Martins is again dropped for the next match...

[afar]

The media is playing a huge part in this. They to some degree are picking the team we play.

 

KK is understandly following the same line as many others that in a time of crisis you need your old heads on the field, those who have proven themselves in the top flight.

 

The media would have a field day if the likes of Owen, Butt, Barton, Smith and Given were dropped in favour of Martins, Lua Lua, Carrol et al.

 

IMO while KK plays the big names then the fault for this season will be deflected from him to his predessors or the players themselves. The minute he starts to pick his 'own' team instead of the stars then it's his reponsibility.

 

He may also think that the pressure of a relegation fight is too much for some of the younger players in the camp and that the so called big names are the only ones that can handle the situation.

 

It's a straight choice between Owen and Martins, because of their physical size, I don't think any manager would pair them together and on reputation Owen always wins, not that that is right.

[TRon]

The media is playing a huge part in this. They to some degree are picking the team we play.

 

KK is understandly following the same line as many others that in a time of crisis you need your old heads on the field, those who have proven themselves in the top flight.

 

The media would have a field day if the likes of Owen, Butt, Barton, Smith and Given were dropped in favour of Martins, Lua Lua, Carrol et al.

 

IMO while KK plays the big names then the fault for this season will be deflected from him to his predessors or the players themselves. The minute he starts to pick his 'own' team instead of the stars then it's his reponsibility.

 

He may also think that the pressure of a relegation fight is too much for some of the younger players in the camp and that the so called big names are the only ones that can handle the situation.

 

It's a straight choice between Owen and Martins, because of their physical size, I don't think any manager would pair them together and on reputation Owen always wins, not that that is right.

 

I'd pair them together. I don't think we'd be losing much by replacing Smith with Martins, and we'd be gaining a hell of a lot more.

 

[KaKa]

The media is playing a huge part in this. They to some degree are picking the team we play.

 

KK is understandly following the same line as many others that in a time of crisis you need your old heads on the field, those who have proven themselves in the top flight.

 

The media would have a field day if the likes of Owen, Butt, Barton, Smith and Given were dropped in favour of Martins, Lua Lua, Carrol et al.

 

IMO while KK plays the big names then the fault for this season will be deflected from him to his predessors or the players themselves. The minute he starts to pick his 'own' team instead of the stars then it's his reponsibility.

 

He may also think that the pressure of a relegation fight is too much for some of the younger players in the camp and that the so called big names are the only ones that can handle the situation.

 

It's a straight choice between Owen and Martins, because of their physical size, I don't think any manager would pair them together and on reputation Owen always wins, not that that is right.

 

If this was indeed Keegan's thinking then I could somewhat understand, although it would still irritate me immensely.

 

However, Keegan chose to play both Owen and Duff as strikers and left Martins out over the weekend. I was extremely dissapointed by this. I doubt you could find two smaller, weaker specimens of men never mind footballers.

[TRon]

Funnily enough, if you dropped Owen and Smith out of the reckoning and replaced them with the two forwards on the bench - Martins and Carroll - I think you'd have a front pairing that would put the shits up our relegation rivals. Even if they didn't score, they might create enough havoc to get others in.

[KaKa]

Funnily enough, if you dropped Owen and Smith out of the reckoning and replaced them with the two forwards on the bench - Martins and Carroll - I think you'd have a front pairing that would put the shits up our relegation rivals. Even if they didn't score, they might create enough havoc to get others in.

 

This is what makes our whole situation all the more frustrating.

 

We've continuously watched the same people fail us all season, but there isn't even the slightest evidence of any changes being made.

 

Butt, Smith, Duff and Owen are apparently untouchable, having not achieved much of anything this season.

 

Our top goalscorer, despite being away for over a month, however, cannot find a place in the team.

 

Simply infuriating.

[Wullie]

Isn't Martins needing a player alongside him who is a target man 1) totally obvious and 2) what plenty people have been saying since he arrived?

 

His best games were almost always alongside Sibierski. Some of their link up play was excellent at times and Sibierski is pretty limited to say the least, despite being an infinitely better player than Smith.

[johnnypd]

Isn't Martins needing a player alongside him who is a target man 1) totally obvious and 2) what plenty people have been saying since he arrived?

 

His best games were almost always alongside Sibierski. Some of their link up play was excellent at times and Sibierski is pretty limited to say the least, despite being an infinitely better player than Smith.

 

he also played pretty well with dyer iyam.

[Wullie]

Isn't Martins needing a player alongside him who is a target man 1) totally obvious and 2) what plenty people have been saying since he arrived?

 

His best games were almost always alongside Sibierski. Some of their link up play was excellent at times and Sibierski is pretty limited to say the least, despite being an infinitely better player than Smith.

 

he also played pretty well with dyer iyam.

 

Aye, fair point. Just the threat of the pace scared the shit out of teams, including Arsenal at their place.

[KaKa]

Isn't Martins needing a player alongside him who is a target man 1) totally obvious and 2) what plenty people have been saying since he arrived?

 

His best games were almost always alongside Sibierski. Some of their link up play was excellent at times and Sibierski is pretty limited to say the least, despite being an infinitely better player than Smith.

 

That is why I mentioned Berbatov, as the type of player I felt would form a good partnership with Martins.

 

I don't think a standard brutish target man like Heskey would necessarily work too great either.

 

Martins needs someone who drops a little deeper and gets involved with the midfield play and looks to thread things through for him.

[colinmk]

Isn't Martins needing a player alongside him who is a target man 1) totally obvious and 2) what plenty people have been saying since he arrived?

 

His best games were almost always alongside Sibierski. Some of their link up play was excellent at times and Sibierski is pretty limited to say the least, despite being an infinitely better player than Smith.

 

That's very true and I think it had a lot to do with Sibi having a good footballing brain and knowing how to link up with Martins. If Martins plays alongside a clever playmaking striker like Sibi then his game is much, much better. We don't have a striker like that at the moment though.

[KaKa]

When Martins came on yesterday, I knew for a fact he would force a defender to make a mistake and I knew for a fact he would have a decent strike or two at goal from distance.

 

He did both on more than one occasion and caused genuine panic in the Liverpool defence.

 

Despite not having the ideal partner for him in our team right now he simply needs to be out there. He has to be the very first name on our team sheet.

 

That is the honest truth.

[Guest Knightrider]

Adebayor? Been very very impressed with him, not and never will be a goalgetter, but he's a promising player, last season he couldn't do anything, looked way out of his depth, came on in leaps and bounds since.

 

Coach did you not say this yourself?

 

Adebayor is the same age as Martins is he not? So if you felt he went from not being able to do anything to becoming a promising player and furthermore a goal getter which you didn't feel he could ever become, then why do you feel Martins will not progress any further?

 

Sorry but Adebayor is a far better footballer than Martins and in every way too. I understand the point about playing with better players under such guidance as Wenger and with the kind of football they play but looking at Adebayor as an individual his all-round game is on another level to Martins' and that's because he has more genuine talent allied with good co-ordination and decision making. He's a very clever play and his runs off the ball, the way he drags defenders out of place and his use of the flanks despite being a predominantly central player is first-class. He's a pivotal link in Arsenal's chain and a focal point for them up front. He makes that team even better, it isn't the other way around. He's just a much better all-rounder I'm afraid.

[Wullie]

Adebayor looked a fucking carthorse more often than not for a good while.

[PM]

Of course they`re not finished articles! These lads might be more or less the same ability wise, but they`re still miles better than 99% of other kids who try just as hard as them in the teams they play for on sunday mornings! Theyve all got something extra.

 

They do have something extra, their physical strengths more often than not. Trust me, what talent is in academies isn't that much different to what is out there in Sunday league kids' football. The gap isn't that big. I suggest you go and watch a few academy games and then a few normal Sunday league kids' football games to see for yourself. What you will notice is that a lot of academy kids are bigger, stronger and quicker but natural ability wise, there isn't much between them.

 

Having been in the middle of numerous games of both types, I can confirm this is bollocks.

[The College Dropout]

I can't agree HTT.

 

Looked a donkey when he first arrived. his overall game has come on leaps and bounds.

 

He was no great shakes in France either.

[Guest Knightrider]

Of course they`re not finished articles! These lads might be more or less the same ability wise, but they`re still miles better than 99% of other kids who try just as hard as them in the teams they play for on sunday mornings! Theyve all got something extra.

 

They do have something extra, their physical strengths more often than not. Trust me, what talent is in academies isn't that much different to what is out there in Sunday league kids' football. The gap isn't that big. I suggest you go and watch a few academy games and then a few normal Sunday league kids' football games to see for yourself. What you will notice is that a lot of academy kids are bigger, stronger and quicker but natural ability wise, there isn't much between them.

 

Your theory may apply to academies in the UK, but certainly doesn't apply to academies that are more successful at nurturing talent, such as in Holland, France and Brazil. Just look at Ajax for an example: most of their (former) players are midgets but they are technically very good and gifted. According to your theory the likes of Van der Vaart and Sneijder wouldn't have a chance to make it as a footballer. The facts are they are amongst the best in their profession because they showed early promise technically and joined an academy capable of developing that talent..

 

I would say you have just chosen the country and club which probably backs up Coach's argument better than any other. It is well known Dutch clubs, particularly Ajax, have been streets ahead of most other countries for their acadamies. At Ajax they were teaching kids how to dance and stuff to improve their balance years and years ago, as well as making them play with tenis balls in small spaces with small goals. It might not be a complete coincidence that they generally tend to have apparently gifted ball players.

However I do agree with your point - if it is all down to coaching, why aren't they all as good as Van der Vaart on the ball, since they've all had the same coaching?

 

I think you misunderstood Coach's point tbh..

 

I've read it again and can't see how I've misunderstood, but sorry if I have. I'm not the sharpest tool in the box at the best of times!

 

You both have to an extent. First off this isn't my "theory" Unbelievable!, it's a real shift that exists in the English game where youth football and youth development is concerned. You highlighting foreign setups actually helps prove my point that our way isn't the best way. In Holland technical ability is more important than anything else and their academies and coaching setup are light years ahead of our own, as are their attitudes to football development full stop. It's not all down to coaching either float one in, again that's not my point. This is how a lot of English clubs and our development scene thinks, not me. Indeed if their coaching programmes are so good and if they can indeed teach any kid technical skills as their research papers claim, then why are we not producing more top players?!

 

For me the reason why we are not producing more top players isn't down to a lack of talent in our game, we have tons of it, it's down to what we do with that talent or rather what we don't do across a whole spectrum of things from coaching to the size of pitches we play them on. The whole environment from top to bottom is wrong.

[Guest Knightrider]

Of course they`re not finished articles! These lads might be more or less the same ability wise, but they`re still miles better than 99% of other kids who try just as hard as them in the teams they play for on sunday mornings! Theyve all got something extra.

 

They do have something extra, their physical strengths more often than not. Trust me, what talent is in academies isn't that much different to what is out there in Sunday league kids' football. The gap isn't that big. I suggest you go and watch a few academy games and then a few normal Sunday league kids' football games to see for yourself. What you will notice is that a lot of academy kids are bigger, stronger and quicker but natural ability wise, there isn't much between them.

 

Having been in the middle of numerous games of both types, I can confirm this is bollocks.

 

What age groups PM? Obviously your 16 year old academy kids after a few years of coaching 2 hours a time 3 times a week using state of the art facilities are going to be more polished than the same age group who train once a week and play the game for fun with their local junior side. At the lower age levels, 7 and upwards however, based on games I've seen I can honestly say the talent or ability gap is not that big, or certainly not as big as you'd imagine. The standard of football may be better, but ability?

[Guest Knightrider]

I think anyone trying to draw comparisons with Adebayor is clutching at straws tbh.

[The College Dropout]

Of course they`re not finished articles! These lads might be more or less the same ability wise, but they`re still miles better than 99% of other kids who try just as hard as them in the teams they play for on sunday mornings! Theyve all got something extra.

 

They do have something extra, their physical strengths more often than not. Trust me, what talent is in academies isn't that much different to what is out there in Sunday league kids' football. The gap isn't that big. I suggest you go and watch a few academy games and then a few normal Sunday league kids' football games to see for yourself. What you will notice is that a lot of academy kids are bigger, stronger and quicker but natural ability wise, there isn't much between them.

 

Having been in the middle of numerous games of both types, I can confirm this is bollocks.

 

What age groups PM? Obviously your 16 year old academy kids after a few years of coaching 2 hours a time 3 times a week using state of the art facilities are going to be more polished than the same age group who train once a week and play the game for fun with their local junior side. At the lower age levels, 7 and upwards however, based on games I've seen I can honestly say the talent or ability gap is not that big, or certainly not as big as you'd imagine. The standard of football may be better, but ability?

 

There's as much difference in footballing ability as their is intelligence in young children. Obviously alot can go wrong and right in later years but differences are there.

 

I've watched my 16 year old brother and 14 year old nephew play football for 8 years. My nephew in particular has always stood out and he might not even "make the grade"he plays for the Arsenal youths so I will forever be  . I've watched my brother play for Crystal Palace youths and for a number of years it's been obvious who will definitely go on to bigger things... 2 of them have broken into the Palace first team this year.

 

 

From a young age it's obvious who really has what it takes.

[Guest float one in]

Of course they`re not finished articles! These lads might be more or less the same ability wise, but they`re still miles better than 99% of other kids who try just as hard as them in the teams they play for on sunday mornings! Theyve all got something extra.

 

They do have something extra, their physical strengths more often than not. Trust me, what talent is in academies isn't that much different to what is out there in Sunday league kids' football. The gap isn't that big. I suggest you go and watch a few academy games and then a few normal Sunday league kids' football games to see for yourself. What you will notice is that a lot of academy kids are bigger, stronger and quicker but natural ability wise, there isn't much between them.

 

Your theory may apply to academies in the UK, but certainly doesn't apply to academies that are more successful at nurturing talent, such as in Holland, France and Brazil. Just look at Ajax for an example: most of their (former) players are midgets but they are technically very good and gifted. According to your theory the likes of Van der Vaart and Sneijder wouldn't have a chance to make it as a footballer. The facts are they are amongst the best in their profession because they showed early promise technically and joined an academy capable of developing that talent..

 

I would say you have just chosen the country and club which probably backs up Coach's argument better than any other. It is well known Dutch clubs, particularly Ajax, have been streets ahead of most other countries for their acadamies. At Ajax they were teaching kids how to dance and stuff to improve their balance years and years ago, as well as making them play with tenis balls in small spaces with small goals. It might not be a complete coincidence that they generally tend to have apparently gifted ball players.

However I do agree with your point - if it is all down to coaching, why aren't they all as good as Van der Vaart on the ball, since they've all had the same coaching?

 

I think you misunderstood Coach's point tbh..

 

I've read it again and can't see how I've misunderstood, but sorry if I have. I'm not the sharpest tool in the box at the best of times!

 

You both have to an extent. First off this isn't my "theory" Unbelievable!, it's a real shift that exists in the English game where youth football and youth development is concerned. You highlighting foreign setups actually helps prove my point that our way isn't the best way. In Holland technical ability is more important than anything else and their academies and coaching setup are light years ahead of our own, as are their attitudes to football development full stop. It's not all down to coaching either float one in, again that's not my point. This is how a lot of English clubs and our development scene thinks, not me. Indeed if their coaching programmes are so good and if they can indeed teach any kid technical skills as their research papers claim, then why are we not producing more top players?!

 

For me the reason why we are not producing more top players isn't down to a lack of talent in our game, we have tons of it, it's down to what we do with that talent or rather what we don't do across a whole spectrum of things from coaching to the size of pitches we play them on. The whole environment from top to bottom is wrong.

 

Ok Coach, cheers for the explanation. You seem to know a lot about these things.

[Shak]

I think anyone trying to draw comparisons with Adebayor is clutching at straws tbh.

 

Adebayor is a better player than Martins likely ever will be, in my opinion.

 

But when they both first came to England, Martins looked the better player. This despite being younger, and despite playing in a much worse team.

 

You're rattling on in one poorly constructed post after the other about the importance of coaching and all this, but really does it matter how a footballer becomes effective at the end of the day?

 

You seem to be making Martins a scapegoat for the entire approach to underage football in England, a prank of an arguement in itself, but at the end of the day he's still a fairly effective player, and can become even more so in time.

 

The whole "We Coach Kids The Wrong Way" arguement is a valid one as far as I can see, but I really don't see what it has to do with Martins, and how useful a player he is, at all.

[Guest Knightrider]

From a young age it's obvious who really has what it takes.

 

I disagree myself as there are far too many factors involved unless a kid has outstanding ability, the type that will develop into another Rooney or Gazza. The only real certainty in youth development is that there are no certainties.

 

Good stuff regarding your brother and nephew btw.

[Guest Knightrider]

I think anyone trying to draw comparisons with Adebayor is clutching at straws tbh.

 

Adebayor is a better player than Martins likely ever will be, in my opinion.

 

But when they both first came to England, Martins looked the better player. This despite being younger, and despite playing in a much worse team.

 

You're rattling on in one poorly constructed post after the other about the importance of coaching and all this, but really does it matter how a footballer becomes effective at the end of the day?

 

You seem to be making Martins a scapegoat for the entire approach to underage football in England, a prank of an arguement in itself, but at the end of the day he's still a fairly effective player, and can become even more so in time.

 

The whole "We Coach Kids The Wrong Way" arguement is a valid one as far as I can see, but I really don't see what it has to do with Martins, and how useful a player he is, at all.

 

Another who has totally misread my posts it seems. I'm not using Martins as a scapegoat at all, the fact youth football has cropped up is a byproduct of the debate as a whole which has since shifted away from Martins and his ability or lack of. I'm not rattling on about the importance of coaching either. Re-read my posts. I'll give you the poorly constructed posts swipe

[Mr. Snrub]

From a young age it's obvious who really has what it takes.

 

I disagree myself as there are far too many factors involved unless a kid has outstanding ability, the type that will develop into another Rooney or Gazza. The only real certainty in youth development is that there are no certainties.

 

Good stuff regarding your brother and nephew btw.

 

Putting Rooney in the same league as Gazza is blasphemous.

[Shak]

Fair enough, I really don't want to re-read all your posts mind you though, due to the aforementioned shoddy structure.

 

Question then.

 

Who would you start against Birmingham then if you had to choose one or the other, Owen or Martins?