It bugs me like mad that those who would like some decent youth integration are then accused of wanting nowt but youth and that they would start Humphreys over Demichelis and Roberts over Navas every week, as if we're that unreasonable - yet we've never said anything like that. They literally ignore all points and just revert to nonsense like that. I've said it a thousand times before. If teams like Newcastle, Villa or whatever can take points off us despite starting one of their academy kids, an academy kid that has played against our academy kids in youth football and been comprehensively outplayed, then why should we all of a sudden lose if we include one of our kids for thirty minutes?
I'd like to understand the reasoning behind that. Our youth palyers are proven better than the vast majority in the country given their performances in cups, and leagues etc at youth level, yet they're deemed more likely to cause us problems, despite other lesser clubs often using one or two of their own? So we really can't afford to have one promising player amongst ten top class seniors for half hour? Yet a lower club can start one probably lesser promising player amongst ten slightly less top class seniors...and therefore we will lose? It doesn't make sense logically.
Use people like Evans, Bryan, whatever, to relax the strain on Fernandinho, Yaya when we can. Sagna's played every game in Zaba's absence, and he's knackered, clearly. Give Maffeo a go for ONE game against lesser opposition from the bench just to relax the strain on him. Yet we don't, and our players will get injured and instead we get ridiculous quotes from Pellegrini saying we have only 13 players, completely and utterly retardedly dismissing our youth players as promising players. Proper kick in the teeth. He should be saying 'we have 13 fit senior players, but we have promising youth players i have a lot of faith in'...yet he pretends they don't exist. How is that good management? It isn't. It's awful.
