Reply With QuoteI do sometimes feel that it is difficult to be critical of our younger players on here, some people get very defensive.
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
There have been a lot of discussions about our younger players and giving them time, will they be good enough, do they have what it takes etc? Some refer to them as kids. I see them more as young lads and think of much younger players as kids.
John Toshack at 16, Andy Dibble at 17. There are others.
So why are we so protective of players in their early 20s? I'm not having a go at them, I find it interesting. What do people think about this and what do CCMB members who saw these much younger players make their debuts think?
I stress I'm not targetting our own younger players or negatively critiquing them.
I do sometimes feel that it is difficult to be critical of our younger players on here, some people get very defensive.
We don't seem to have anyone that will be anything more than adequate at Championship level.
When Ramsey made his debut at 16, you could immediately tell he was something special, same when I first saw Cameron Jerome play.
Thinking back further Earnie was another who impressed from the start - I think Ledley did too but may be wrong on that . The likes of maybe Darcy Blake , Jason Perry and Damon Searle took longer to establish themselves, though it was at a lower level
There have been some good bits individually from all the youngsters tried so far but not sustained for a full game and not one performance ( with maybe the exception of Colwill against Forest away) to suggest they’ll be something special. Doesn’t help them though when the senior pros are struggling so much
I think that's a part of the problem. Put our youngsters in a good team and I think most of them would copeOriginally Posted by Don Corleone
Lee Jarman. Came into the first team at around 17, if memory serves. Was bigged up as the next big thing, but ended up out of the Football League at quite an early age. Maybe the protection younger players get now would have benefited Jarman more, rather than be thrown in to first team football at 17?
Everyone is different though, some can handle the expectation others can’t.
I think that the level of protection afforded to players is a by-product of the pressure in the game due to the money involved, which is now very different to 1992, when Sir Alex could take more chances.
Age 17, looking to pass the ball forward and losing it, or age 32 and looking to pass, sideways or backwards and losing it.
I know what I’d go for
He was a piss head with a bad attitude. That’s why he didn’t make it.
I think that it's a difficult situation for fans because we have a vested interest in the club from an emotional point. When a young player breaks through and shows promise or traits that have been missing then we as supporters will naturally become enthusiastic and in many cases, protective of these players, after all, they're as close to being 'one of us' as it gets, especially if they're local, and the protective arm of supporters will be extended towards them in a way not afforded to say someone like Dion Sanderson who had just turned 20 when he came to us and without any first team experience. He was regularly criticised for the way he defended, his positioning etc. I'm sure that he would've received less criticism if he had come through our system.
I think that the reality is that when these young players get themselves in a position to play first team football, they have to show that they are good enough for sustained periods of a match, not in flutters, they do have to adapt very quickly and learn from mistakes made, whether thats through inexperience or poor decision making. It's their big chance and they have to play the cards that they have been dealt, and rightly or wrongly, unless they make an impression, the chances will be limited. Is it fair when a young player comes into a side where the senior players aren't performing, Is it fair that these young players have what seems more scrutiny placed upon them? Probably not. But is there ever a perfect time for any young player to make an impression? This is the industry that they're in, the business side is brutal and they have to make the opportunity work for them. We as fans will always be protective and we will extend the love, the football clubs will not and i assume that these young players are aware of that.
In the past social media wasn’t prevalent like it is these days. Players can get hammered on football messageboards these days and in social media in general. It never used to be like this so it’s much harder for them these days.
^^^ This
In fairness, I don't recall any of our young players getting abuse during a game. Rhys Weston and Cameron Toshack used to raise a few groans from the home crowd, but that was more out of frustration than any real direct attack on them.
It's natural that players are going to be analysed on their performance on social media platforms, regardless of whether they are junior or senior players. You wouldn't expect anything less on a football forum, it's one of its facets.
I agree with the OP though, I regard 16-19 year olds as "kids" in football terms.
Cardiff City 21/22 is an if not unique then a very unusual case though. For the first time in ages, young players are being given a chance in the first team, but, instead of blooding them gradually in, say, end of season matches with not a great deal riding on them, they’re being expected to get us out of relegation trouble by providing the match turning moments that the experienced, “proven” players in the team have been unable to come up with over a period of years. We’re expecting the youngsters to be the 21/22 version of players such as Whittingham, Tomlin, Wilson, Pilkington and others - it’s an awful lot to ask of a group who also face that challenge of establishing themselves in the senior game.
However, I’ve not seen our younger home produced players making the sort of mistakes we’ve seen from experienced defenders that cost us goals almost every week with their mistakes and it’s not tended to be the youngsters who let midfield runners get the wrong side of them and don’t close down opposition players stood twenty to twenty five yards from our goal quick enough. We’re in this mess because we have an appalling home record and because we can’t keep clean sheets - while the younger element have to accept a share of responsibility for the former, the latter, in my opinion, rests far more with senior players who have been failing us this season far more than the youngsters.
Ramsey looked like he had an extra second compared to everyone else on the pitch. It was easy to see that he was an exceptional talent
And yet its the youngsters who get dropped. Morison needs to be bolder in his selections rather just having a go post match
I haven't seen anyone expect the young players to provide match winning moments comparable to the players you mentioned, not on here on in the press. Are you referring to Morison?
And i don't know what the point is in comparing them to the senior players, who are indeed, absolutely rubbish. It's pretty simple in my opinion. The young players coming through have to show that they are progressing, getting better, more experienced etc. Obviously, they need games to do that and i don't think that Morison trusts them. There's also the issue that they are around senior players who aren't performing, that makes their development more difficult.
The way i look at it is like this; They have been brought in because they have something to offer, maybe even more in terms of ability than the senior players. They just have to go out onto the pitch and concentrate on their own performance. If they don't show as much or more than the senior players then they'll be out, because what is the point in putting them in if they're not going to offer more? They can be afforded mistakes and time to adapt, but sadly, not that much due to the nature of the game. I do have some sympathy for them, but this is their opportunity to show what they have, the circumstances are what they are.
Ramsey looked a skinny thing in an oversized shirt and way younger than 16 (I know he was btw). Earnie is one of my all-time favourite players, if not the all time.
I've chatted to a few guys now who've played the game and their view is very much like yours. It's a tough industry and ruthless calls are made. I think I mentioned something similar about the need for any younger player to 'seize the day' in another post. I'm guessing nobody will want to look back with any regrets and feel they didn't give it their best. I'm never sure how long a manager gives a youngster. I don't envy that side of the manager's job.
Forgive me if I'm wrong but I think you are the only one who has picked up on this. When I put the title of the thread up I thought it would attract more discussion about this aspect of kids v lads v youngsters which is why I mentioned a couple of debutants under 18.
I still think it's something we don't like to talk about. Is it because as a society now we tend to infantilise young men who, 70-80 years ago would be leading very different and quite often dangerous lives? I don't know. I'd love to hear more from people regarding this though.
Ramsey
Earnie
Collins
Gunter
Jerome
Ralls
Ledley
All of those players either came through our system or were playing regularly at a young age. All of them were either as good or better than the more established/ senior players within a very short time after making their debut.
Ralls is the odd one out to me. Not because I don't agree with you but because he's a shadow of his younger self and wouldn't have survived alongside Peter Whittingham et al playing the kind of game he plays now. It's pretty bad how a series of managers have stuffed his game.
I'd forgotten about Gunter too. Will any of our current crop be added to that list? Just to be pedantic, what do you regard as a very short time?
10 games i would say. That's just my opinion. If a young player (especially if they're creative) aren't showing progress then they will be out and substituted with 'Experience' Defenders with us just have to be able to stop the opposition adequately enough to get themselves a career, we don't do creative defenders (homegrown) Like i said, it's just my opinion, but there is pressure on young players to show managers that they're progressing, and i would say that they are scrutinised more that established players simply because of their developmental stage. It might not be fair, but it's the way it is, and the way it has always been in my opinion. Agree about Ralls.
I wouldn't write off any youngster completely based on just this season because playing in the current team if you're just making your way in the game is a bit of a poisoned chalice - I honestly think the seventeen year old Aaron Ramsey would have found it hard in the current side with it's residue of players who may have been effective under Warnock or Harris, but are now going over the top or are being found out by our desire to paly more football.
That's why I said that the onus is on the youngsters to come up with match changing moments of skill this season because the older players are very, very unlikely to do so - especially with Keiffer not being the player he was last year. Over the past couple of seasons, Lee Tomlin and Harry Wilson have been charged with being our sole consistent "match changer" and it's instructive to see how they often were unable to influence proceedings in the first halves of games while opponents had the fitness to close them down - this allied, to our frequent inability to supply them with the sort of ball they could do something with meant that we had to wait for the last quarter of the match before Tomlin or Wilson would start making a difference.
This season the Tomlin/Wilson equivalents for the first half of the campaign were Ryan Giles and Rubin Colwill, both of whom were twenty one or under. The former was a success, but is something of a one trick pony - that's not a criticism even if it sounds like one, his crossing is excellent and we've really missed it since he returned to Wolves, but if you can stop his crosses, then he doesn't have much else to hurt you with. As for Colwill, he has been, to use a word I heard to describe his performance for the Under 23s yesterday, patchy, but who else was going to be a better bet in the number ten type role for City this season out of the players available?
One other thing, "patchy" was a diplomatic way of describing Colwill's performance for the Under 23s yesterday, poor would be more like it for me. As I mentioned in my blog piece on the game, some of the others in the team who are close to first team selection redeemed poor first half performances somewhat as the match went on, but I'm afraid Colwill didn't and, although it's unfair to draw too many conclusions from one game, there were a few in yesterday's team that looked like their exposure to the first team had sent them backwards when you compare what they did yesterday with what they were doing in the second half of last season at under 23 level.
Interesting what you say about Colwill and others, concerning their exposure to first team football. What you say is completely plausible in my opinion, it's an interesting theory. It could also mean that they may feel after what they have achieved in the first team, that going back down to U23 is a sort of demotion in real terms.
I do wonder if the expectation has got to Colwill a bit, and that he has stagnated somewhat.
I didn’t think he’d dropped off in form in recent weeks, he wasn’t turning it on in every game, but he hadn’t been doing that earlier in the season either - for me, he was just showing that bit of inconsistency you’d see from a young player coming into the first team in sides that aren’t fighting a relegation battle.
I think you make a fair point about a sense of anti climax about finding themselves back playing at Leckwith in front of one man and his dog. There’s been stacks of games down the years where a City reserve team with plenty of first teamers in it for one reason or another has been pretty awful and it’s accepted that this is because, for example, the last thing they want is an injury which will rule them out for weeks or months, so why shouldn’t it be the same for players such as Colwill, Evans, Bowen and Bagan?
Posting Permissions
