Quote Originally Posted by Tuerto View Post
You post some seriously good stuff, really enjoy your take on things and i find myself agreeing with you on plenty of things. I like it that you're not sentimental or biased about young players coming through and you offer all options in an argument, not just the ones that suit your stand point. You talk like someone who has been around top level sport, or at least a very good standard.

You're right, what goes on during the week is imperative towards a young players development and inclusion. Thing is, as fans, we aren't seeing the character of these players, we don't see what they're like in certain situations on a training pitch, we don't see how they respond. We just look at a player in their position who isn't performing and ask why (Insert Name) isn't playing in front of them. Managers and coaches have to trust players as well, there are loads of factors that us as fans don't take into account or see (For obvious reasons) on a daily basis.

Young players are also in aposition where they have to prove themselves. All players have to go through it. People might think it's wrong, but they can't just be on the same level as the person in their position, they have to be better, like nearly all young players that break through, they were showing more.
You've rumbled my top level sporting prowess there, fair play. Me and my team won three division one titles in a row down gol. What gave it away?

My lad plays hockey for Wales. Amateur sport here but it's given me a few insights into how top level sport works. He broke into the Wales set-up while his club coach had him playing for the second team and that gave me the belief that any coach who wasn't bringing young players through was a cockwomble, basically.

However, while I hated the attitude to the youth sections here that Slade and Warnock had, it dawned on me that one of the reasons they hadn't been playing youngsters was that we hadn't had any who were good enough. I had to modify my position a bit then; coaches and managers should bring youngsters through - but only if they're good enough.

The problem then is how do we know which ones are good enough? Bulut seems to take an interest in the youngsters here but if he doesn't see Ashford as one of his best fifteen or sixteen players is that his misjudgement or does Ashford need to do more in games and in training to justify a place? We can argue that kind of thing till we're blue in the face, and often do, but none of us on here know for sure.