Cowshed

23 minutes ago, nickolas said:

Or we could just not be so negative and play forward rather than constantly go back to Bentley?

Poor tactics and lack of bottle from the players which causes too many negative back passes. 

Going backwards isn't negative = The EPL's top back passers will be playing in the Champions league. The possession is positional and purposeful.

The flaw for BCFC is players are not moving off the trigger (the back pass) into relational distances quickly enough. It becomes possession football in one zone that is inefficient positional play that is nullified. 

On 03/08/2022 at 15:23, phantom said:

It will be interesting to see how this develops over time 

The 63% for females.

I formerly had a job running football sessions for Bristol schools at a sport centre for boys because the schools had no facilities to play on. The schoools were going to take part in the EFL trust tournament. Many of the boys at ten and eleven had not played any organised football. 

I have also ran sesssion for kids with disabilities, who again had played no organised football.

Point here is lack of opportunity is not restricted to one sex etc. 

26 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

What happens to the girls who reach 18, are past youth football and aren’t good enough for elite football? That’s the area I think needs to improve dramatically if you are talking about a true legacy……in participation anyway.

There are womens leagues in Bristol with teams with no toilets and changing rooms. This includes one if not Bristols biggest female club, and its not their fault, its the Councils and Mr Rees ignoring whats happening. We can see these poor standards across the nation.

4G pitches in Bristol can cost £100 an hour for a game. Council run pitches! The daft FA charge services for a FA accreditation stating this faciilty = this FA standard. The cost gets handed to consumers, grass roots clubs end up paying more as the businesses then charge more for the accreditation standards. 

And on this goes limiting not maximising opportunity to play the game.

Investing in more facilities and making the game cheaper and accessible should be the legacy.

26 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Yes indeed. The WSL in its context is even worse than the Premier League in that respect. So if more money comes in it will likely go to pay ever higher wages to star, often foreign, players.

Not what I would call a legacy.

I would not say its likely, it inevitable because its already happened. The WSL is a reflection of home and European and frequently antipodean recruitment - Its seems half the Matildas squad are playing in England. 

Responses to that challenge for the game ? There will no quotas so increasing the standards of homegrown players, and our structure from the grass roots up for the wider benefit of football can and should be the response. That facilities x structure x coaching increases the talent pool for pro clubs. 

33 minutes ago, Robbored said:

One of the senior women involved in the WSL was saying that the average wage of the WSL player is £27k per year 

Yes.

Which is reflective of the status of the womens game. That wage still fills multiplen WSL squads with International players.

33 minutes ago, Robbored said:

 male professional footballers in the PL are paid 10 times that per week 

Which reflects the environment.

33 minutes ago, Robbored said:

 KdB reputedly on £350k  per week.

Man City signed Alanna Kennedy a Australian international.

She won't be on that astrononomicasl sum. She will be paid what the womens market and the signing club thinks her worth is in the womens game.

23 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Can be for a minority. From The Telegraph back in March:

The investigation found that current salaries range from as little as £20,000 per annum to as much as £250,000, plus bonuses, across the 12 top clubs. That top end of the spectrum could well rise, as three sources within the WSL were aware of an England player being offered around £300,000-a-season to sign a new contract this summer.

At the lower end of the scale, Telegraph Sport's investigation found that, according to the most recent accounts available, Birmingham City and Tottenham Hotspur spent the least on employee salaries (figures that included all administrative staff as well as players). Of the WSL clubs to have published details in their 2019-20 financial accounts, both clubs' average salary for employees fell well below the national average wage, with Birmingham's coming to less than £19,000.

So it's a very uncompetitive league of a few rich clubs and the rest there to make up the fixtures.

Which is why foreign players are attracted to the WSL. The wages are high., even the lower end is high hence so many Internatioinal players play here. Bristol City at the bottom end of the pay scale can sign Australian Internationals like Chloe Logarzo. 

The numbers of homegrown players in squads since the inception of the WSL has dropped as wages increase.

4 minutes ago, Lorenzos Only Goal said:

You can do both if you want to expand the women's game, there has to be a realisation that even with the current professionalisation of the women's game wages are still small, and in order to become a professional athlete you need to give up your day job and have enough money to do it.  You have to get more money into at least the top 3 tiers of women's football to enable the professional game to grow, and the grass roots to have a realistic prospect of a career football even if its not the top top tier. 

I dont understand your post. 

Wages in the WSL can be up to 250k in a league with attendances that are not high. The WSL attracts so many foreigjn players because of its high wages. The WSL has up to 50% of its players coming from abroad.

Paying higher wages means clubs look abroad. Small time Bristol City women have signed Australian internationals. 

Football isn't a realistic carear prospect for kids. I say thas as a I hope a responsible coach and parent of a kid in the academy system. Waht we should be doing is concentrate on grass roots footall ensuring that this  experience is the best it can be and opportunity is to create the exceptional talents, that will progress.

That means that kids get to play football in school. In an affluent City like Bristol many don't, the schools dont have pitches. That means that in girls football they have a pitch, and have changing rooms, that have a female toilet . In an affluent City like Bristol we are not managing that, grounds like the Imperial supporting scores of girls teams has had NO changing rooms and toilets for YEARS. Where do girls go to toilet there? Bushes? Periods? The useless Mayor knows about this. The facility thing there is a national standard.

Facilities and coaching. Thats where success should be pursued. More 4G pitches, better toilets, more coaches, because the game has grown at grass roots as we learned that success starts from the bottom. England started mirroring performance culture with its future games, blue prints for football the coaching and performance models of foreign FA's over a decade ago. Get more in at the grass root level, make that experience better, coach them more skillfully and we produce more exceptional talents for pro clubs to feed off, and they will feed.

8 minutes ago, Lorenzos Only Goal said:

That's just how the pyramid works.  But the cash needs to filter down from the elite tiers.   To build a broader set of professional clubs and players in professional teams. 

Its not a just how. Its the FA reacting to the challenges of female football. The structure is very different to the male game and has to be.

You appear there to want cash to build professional clubs,which would take money away from grass rooots football and focus on elites. 

4 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

This is the danger. Lots of rhetoric flying around with no real solutions. If this tournament is not built upon properly properly the game will be a largely elite sport for years to come. The only “solution” the head of the Women’s game has advanced is for Premier League clubs to get involved which, as we all know, means the game will be built from the top down rather than bottom up and controlled by a few based on commercial returns and the grass roots will get trampled all over.

Football for females is not an elite sport. Far more females play football at grass roots level than elite level. Female football isnt built from the top down. A girl will start out in grass roots football and then if she is good enough will play and train at a regional development centre, her local County FA and then she might if exceptional attract the interest of a pro club. That is the FA and its regional FA's controlling football. The top the pro clubs control the top = WSL league teams look after what is a small % of football. 

51 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Virtually all women's 'professional' football is funded by parent clubs. At the top end to the tune of many millions of pounds each year. I think it had been reported Chelsea, as WSL champions, to the tune of upward of £200k per week. Sponsorship is presently around £10m a year for the top two tiers, The Premier gave a similar amount from the last TV deal for the overall development of the women's game (all tiers,) not sure if the EPL contributes (other than allowing cross subsidy from men's football.) But if that last measure is all it'll outstrip all other sponsorships by miles.

In City's case and in the last accounts the women's team had debts of around £93k, of which around £22k were EBITDA in year and thereafter consumed within the overall losses. Small change? Oh the 15 employees, all their wages, all their costs and expenses were reported against the overarching account, not the women's team. The woman's game reports it's income but not it's expenses on the pretext the club offsets such losses from FFP/P&S calculations. 

The EPL contributes around 1.75 million pounds a year to the WSL. Barclays sponsorship is 3 million pounds per season. Barclays is providing further inverstment to the FA to invest in womens football that is around 30 million pounds in total over the three years.

Chelsea see fit to run their womens football as they see fit. They have brought in players from twelve nations. They lose money. A choice of the owners, but this team isn't dependant on the mens game, thery are dependant on their owners. Arsenal are similar, they have even less English players than Chelsea and that is dependant on the choice of their owners to fund the team. Man City pay players 25 - 250k a season, that is not dependant on the game, or mens football, or sponsorship, its again the choice of their owners.

The mens game offsets v FFP.

Your point? With respect in regards to dependancy of course the womens game rides on the back of mens football, but its not dependant on the mens game for its existence.  

3 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

My 'very poor' post simply highlighted the blind adulation, bandwagon jumping  that pervades today, in this case the phrase 'done something no men's team could do since 66'. As I highlighted there is NO comparison, though clearly reading whilst wearing rose-tinted glasses is difficult for some.  For one the 'professional' men's game is required to publish accounts that meet certain criteria. The 'professional' women's game is that in name only. Wholly bankrupt, minimal revenue (why might that be,) and dependant upon funding provided by, er, the men's game.

I posed the rhetorical question if there was a comparison just how comparable are the two, then proffered my own answer? Few were brave enough to suggest an answer knowing they'd be shot down if so doing. That's the nature of debate these days.

I congratulated the woman several times for their achievements and for the impact they'll have on the development of woman's football.

But we'll leave it to the bandwagon jumpers who, if true to their word, will ensure a massive expansion in attendance at woman's football this season. They sure as hell need the money.

This is incorrect. The sponsorship the womens game recieves is greater than the money that is received from the EPL that would never cover the costs of the WSL and its teams.  

41 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

To be fair well done, bravo and all that but they haven't 'done something no men's team could do since 66', for men aren't permitted to play in woman's tournaments (at least not yet.)

Admittedly I only watched about 30 mins of the whole tournament, but that was sufficient. By all means celebrate a great achievement for woman's football but in all seriousness answer this: Against which City representative side do you think the Lionesses would remain competitive? I reckon they might give the boys U16s a game but by U19s they'd struggle. U23s they'd be played off the park. And that's City.

From the few bits I did see the Spaniards were technically light years superior to anybody else and attempted to play something resembling adult men's football. England may well be champions of Europe and good on them. But if comparing to men's football, lack of ball control, ball retention and kick and rush, there is no comparison. I trust their success has women and girls rushing to pull on their boots to get involved, for that can only be a good thing  Just spare any conflation with the men's game as the two have little in common. 

 

There isnt any. The game is divided by sex. 

You in your second paragraph are attempting to conflate the two., 

13 minutes ago, View from the Dolman said:

Might well be interesting and beneficial but sharing an inaccessible link to an invite-only service isn't going to help many people here.

I oddly can access it witout registering. Check the IFAB site or go through the links here at the bottom - Refereeing World: Offside: ‘deliberate play’ guidelines clarified

It is interesting to go through the examples. My Son refs and doesnt get eight. 

7 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

My thoughts exactly. Guidelines are useful, but there's now five explicit things to debate rather than one. Is a referee/linesman expected to run through all of that, in real time, during a game?

There's a disconnect (as there is with VAR generally) between the precision of the technology used to review the incident - video, digital lines etc - and the interpretation of the written words used to analyse that technology.

Its interesting and beneficial to look at the examples - https://red.fifa.com/play/collection/13010/Law11-Offside:deliberateplayanddeflection?cId=16&itemId=12995

48 minutes ago, TomF said:

Would any keeper be expecting it? 

The keeper is in the scoop technique position, hands down. The hand position is for a low shot or cross. She cant go into whats called the K barrier efficiently because of her right foot being flat. Its not very good being polite.

10 hours ago, Erithacus said:

Who would have thought that a Spanish side would turn up as cannon fodder and politely roll over? Only a fool. They were more than prepared and had a really solid gameplan that showed England up in a poor light for much of the match. Having run away with the group games we suddenly had to face a genuine team with talent and determination. They knew that the midfield pair of Walsh and Stanway were key to going forwards and they were suffocated. We didn't have anything like as much possession time and consequently found attacking difficult. The supply was cut off radically. Result: the likes of White, Hemp and Mead were left spectating for too long; Kirby didn't fare much better. And that is how you stop England.

I was impressed (but not surprised) by Spain's approach - they were quick, neat and lively. Just like the men's team. In the end it was as much about effort and stamina as talent. They had all the means to go through, but they can be proud of their work tonight. They will build on this. In particular I will pick out Bonmati as the pick of a thoroughly effective midfield - she was a constant presence and controlled a lot of what happened.

With the England front line not having much of a sniff, some short-comings were highlighted. White is a great finisher with a (Lineker-esque) nose for goal but is not the target (wo)man that Russo can be. The latter is more the battering ram centre forward. Hemp was widely proclaimed as the wing wizzard but had hardly any input. Mead on the opposite flank seems a little out of position.

Meanwhile, the defence had a busy night. Rachel Daly (a striker for Houston) plays as left back - quite a step for Weigman to explain. However, even though her poor challenge for the Spanish goal was bad, she was not as unweildy as Greenwood when she replaced her. Millie Bright was dominant when called for; Williamson was a quiet but assured partner.

I fear there will be pages of newprint in Spain about the substitutions made by the coach. They did change the flow of the play. Weigman trumped him. But the pain is in Spain tonight; they deserved more but sometimes football goes like that.

So, one decent whack and England go through to the Semis. Tonight has been a real wake-up that hopefully will bring a greater focus to the camp. They might play the winner of the Germanic derby, Austria v Germany (Brentford). If the lessons are learned this Lioness side could just win it all yet.

As a sporting spectacle, it must be said that the standard of play and competitiveness is higher than ever before. The women's game at international level is impressing many previously indifferent fans. Can it be that the girls are putting the nation through the mill just like the men? Who would have thought?

Its a bit different. Daly doesnt play as a centre forward, she plays as a false nine. She also plays wing back.

If you look at the goal England lost the ball playing out. They are not effecient playing through the first third. Players dont drop in to create options and numerical superiority. Bronze is very good on the ball but was struggling all night as what was in front of her was playing in concrete sox. Northern Ireland had some success stopping England, and another level Spain had a lot of success playing with an overload in the centre out of possession v players that were static. Spains goal came from Mead failing to come short and Spain knicking the ball. That was coming all night, its not great defending but it was a collective error, Daly was left isoloated 1v1 after England lost the ball and players didnt get back in shape. Bronze was isolated on numerous occassions by team mates not getting goal side. or tucking in..

Mead and Hemp turned over alot of possession all night, far too much. They were not that keen on defending the possession they lost.

Bright was superb, and needed to be. You dont play that badly and win twice. I doubt they will be that poor again. 

1 hour ago, Steve Watts said:

With the announcement only made yesterday, with details not yet finalised the I would be very suprised if the GFA aren't invited to form part of the trial, which I would imagine filter down to Avon Youth and Hanham Minor leagues accordingly.  I presume it's not for the individual leagues to propose and vote for it, but will be mandated by the local FA depending on participation.

 

The fixtures for the AYL start 4/9/22. The AYL would be able to implement rules changes and refereeing rule changes via the Somerset and Gloucs FA's would be done in that time? The AYL league AGM was two{?) weeks ago. A shift would be needed to put this in place!!

1 hour ago, Steve Watts said:

It's an interesting one. As coaches we do attempt to get the kids playing football rather than sending it long, but these are developmental ages where football should be fun.  If a team is not as good defensively and struggle to bring the ball out from defence, then a long kick up field is sometimes a good way of relieving that pressure.  I've seen teams get battered in matches because they are up against much stronger opposition.  The demoralising effect that can have on a young kid can be massive.  Kick off, lose possession, concede...rinse and repeat ad nauseum.....We would still be trying to put an emphasis on playing good attractive football, but that can't come overnight with such varying degrees of ability and potential. 

 

U12 level is a development level obviously but its no longer the foundation stage. Expectation being in a competitive league with scores and results and tables has altered. 

Is that rinse and repeat and defeat fun? What actually is fun? For some its playing with mates, for some its learning new skills and some its winning. None of those answers are wrong. Fun is intrinsic and extrinsic.

Playing football and good attractive football is subjective. Looking at local leagues the top divisions are frequently sides who dont play through the third etc. That playing footbal and good attractive football is not their fun winning football. We see risk averse football. We see practical football. We also sees coaches understanding what they have as they dont play out because they have players without the aptitude, and skill to do so. There are degrees of utopianism in this good football ideal.

We would still be trying to put an emphasis on playing good attractive football, but that can't come overnight with such varying degrees of ability and potential .. How about from U7 this become a reality in a long term. Say this team will finally start playing out efficiently by U14 onwards - That development vision needs to be shared at the outset, and the risks and reward isnt for all.

The FA want us to remember who we are coaching, why and what we want to achieve. This cant be the same for every team and Coach.

1 hour ago, Steve Watts said:

Certainly a challenge that we'll be happy to try and tackle....we've certainly been given work to do at under 11's if the GFA do take part in the trial.  Already getting the kids used to 9 a side and offsides for this season!  One more thing to add to the mix.  I should imagine "Playing out from the back" will be a drill that is deployed even more in training over the coming weeks and months. 

No information on the penalty for deliberately heading the ball either.  Direct/Indirect free kick?  I would presume the latter, as with hand balls, but does that also therefore mean that players could in theory be sent off for a headed clearance for denying a clear goalscoring opportunity.....  Will be interesting to revisit this once all information is released.

In the US there are indirect free kicks for heading in leagues with no heading rules. I dont know anything past that. The cynic in me instantly looks at how advantage can be created, % long football could become more efficient. 

Will be interesting to revisit this once all information is released .. I would like to watch some games of it.

5 minutes ago, Barrs Court Red said:

In fairness I read it as “up to” u12, didn’t realise they’re included.  I wonder if they’ll restrict drop kicks, as like you say, by that age there’s plenty who can get the ball box to box with a single kick. 

Its a trial and as far as I know this doesnt include local leagues here. Leagues are being invited to take part by the FA, and the Avon youth league AGM has just passed and it was not proposed then. 

Its an interesting proposition. The devil is in the detail. Non heading non aerial football is utopian. Kids nature is to smash it, whether by desire or stress. At u12 kids have gone into competitive leagues, and focus is there overtly on winning, and an obvious theme of risk averse forward and up first play.

3 hours ago, Barrs Court Red said:

From what I’ve seen it won’t make much difference. They play on such small pitches it’s only really goal goal kicks or throws where the ball is in the air 

The U12 nine a side pitch is up to 80 metres long. At U12 they are using the AYL as an example frequently teams going back to front. Twelve year old players (some) can have a lot of range with a size four ball at that age. I certainly have had kids at that age scoring from headers, kids scoring from thirty and forty metres, and seen keepers go box to box. 

2 hours ago, spudski said:

...do we or other Clubs still have these?

Where a family will be paid to take in young players who have moved away from their family, but not old enough to live on their own. 

The Reuben McAllister thread made me think of this.

I guess George Best is the most famous who did this.

Yes. Alex Scott was housed by City with a family. 

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I read about this a year or so back.  My instinct was that although it plays out in age group stuff, surely it evens out in senior football.  I was surprised that there is an impact / bias.

There was a Welsh player (can’t recall his name), who recently got his first cap, who felt that he’d been penalised by when he was born.  His parents took him abroad where the school year was different, etc, etc.

Here it is - Jamie Lawrence

https://thecorrespondent.com/406/the-curious-tale-of-the-football-international-nobody-ever-heard-of-because-he-was-born-in-the-wrong-month

There is a study conducted by John Doyle on age relative age effect (RAE). Taking 1000 pro players as a sample there should be a 25% spread across birth dates v the four quarters of the year. The first half is always highest represented, the last quarter the lowest. Take the worlds 100 most valuable players and the same RAE theme is evident. Working backwards the RAE themes are present at pro U18, EUFA AND FIFA U tournaments. The theme of age related effect is there from grass roots level to the pro game,

This is for the business of VAR. Those sat in the VAR gallery get a juicy carear out of this. 

The impact on the game. We have and have increasingly two tiered rules. The trend here is to remove decision making from the ref and assistant refs. Assistant reffing at the top is in decline. The assistant ref does less and less. The assistants get to check the nets, flag for a throw in, flag for goal kicks, corners but cant be trusted with much else. Science is taking over the big stuff.

Reffing in general is in decline and technology is removing opportunity to progress upwards. You wont be needed that much fellas and that will have an impact at every level. 

11 hours ago, pillred said:

There was a decent interval between the season finishing and the Nations league, we have all had jobs I got a coupe of weeks off twice a year if I was lucky, why would playing a game you loved make you fatigued? I'm sorry but I just don't buy it, sorry but we will have to agree to disagree.

Because the game is physical and mental. A player cannot physically maintain physical fitness for an entire season, or an extended season. Fitness morphs over months. Fitness over a season diminishes frequently. Pre-season training involves threshold training. Players will be exerted over normal physical norms to gain a physical peak at the start of the season. This training to attain that physical peak cannot be endured physically season long, the body will fail, and players bodies over a season have to fatigue. 

With respect the game of football cannot be compared to normal employment. I work in an industry that is extremely stressful, but the stresses cant be compared to football. I don’t go into work expected to be in a aggressive intense challenge state. My work doesn’t fill my body full of performance and stress inducing hormones. I do not experience extreme highs of emotion in my work.  I also do not have employment that strips me of my autonomy in the same manner as  foootball does to individuals. To play football you effectively surrender aspects of your personality to a coaches/Managers direction, to a game.

I loved football and train train game at Tiverton train train game at Taunton ****** my head months into a season.

.

23 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

I dont think he does, he was clearly trying different players. Isn't that what most of us have been screaming out for? If he'd played his best 11 and we'd breezed past Hungary like some expected, what would we have learnt? We do that in qualifying.

Nations League is ultimately glorified friendlies, great to win but even if we won the tournament some woudl still be unhappy and say its a pointless trophy.

I think it's silly to call it a back 7. Firstly it was a back 4 and 1 holding last night, then it was a back 3 with wing backs playing high and again still only Phillips "holding". It was in no way a back 7 last night

No is not silly to call Southgates formations a back seven. Their starting position are deep. Its not width depth and dispersal. And his two or one hm/cdms are deep with focus on reserve principles etc. Phillips holding is no player maker. He is no pivot. He does not make key passes =Problem =Expectation.  

Screaming out for no different players? No idea. I would expect attempts to improve upon high possession low chance creation. In the 3CB's, 2WB's, 2DCM's there is an obvious problem it was obvious in the Euros and it become more obvious now. England cant  play out efficiently. High possession low chance creation has already failed. Performance indicators were there, and this form was in the post. The different  players have not altered MrSouthages shapes, or intent, its still focussed on building play out in the same manners. Hungary dropped off and lapped it up twice. Its a coaching flaw not one of the players making. Same same= Again.

8 hours ago, Sheltons Army said:

 

I woud guess Phants , a chance to do some intensive work on training ground , probably then give them a few days / a week off , before a mini pre season 

 

Working on passing patterns to get the ball out of his back seven. Hopefully he wont continue thinking Phillips in front of the multiple CB's is a player maker. Possession is well and good but by the time the ball enters the final third, if it does at all it has moss on it.