Two Year Academy Transfer Ban Imposed On City

[Frank76]

No, I don't know much about youth football, I never claimed to. I clearly do not as know much as you, the fount of all knowledge.

Of course, we cannot sign 11 year olds from the continent. I don't believe I said that was the case. The fact is, we can still sign juniors from abroad of a certain age. It's a one year ban. That's it. No great shakes. It may mean we are less likely to win the u12s next year. So what?

We can't sign 'juniors' from abroad at any age unless those juniors are young men above the age of 16.

 

[Manc in London]

We can't sign 'juniors' from abroad at any age unless those juniors are young men above the age of 16.

Ffs, do you read other people's posts before responding?

 

[quiet_riot]

The fiasco with not informing the testers on two desperate occasions where players were

I see what you did there.

 

[FanchesterCity]

Am pretty sure when you look at our youth team more players will play professional football from that group than Oldhams as a comparison. Our players play against the cream of world football in their age group and can be seen playing throughout the league's. I'm not sure Oldham could boast similar numbers.

The cream of world football in their age group is overstating it a bit when you're talking about a 9 year old (imo). By the time they're 15, yes, but by then, many of those kids will have been through more than one academy, so it's a bit misleading to think City 'produced' them - it's a tricky subject though - determining who has contributed most to the development of a player.

The other thing you're missing is that we are talking about the players who aren't rejected... by definition, the ones STILL in the academy are getting to play, but many leave the academy too. We're talking about a child at 9 - what are his ODDS of making it at the highest level? - 1/50,000 maybe. What are the odds of him making it at any professional level? 1/1000 maybe. IF a player goes to City does it increase his odds of making it at any level? or would sticking with Oldham be a better bet?

There's not much evidence to suggest that making City's academy for a year or two, then being dropped by us is any more beneficial - regardless of which other players you played with, or against. Plenty of lads who are 15 and spent most of their time at a lower league academy end up at a PL one anyway, and then go on to make it - because identifying talent at 15 is more reliable than at 9... (but it's still highly speculative).

 

[Frank76]

The cream of world football in their age group is overstating it a bit when you're talking about a 9 year old (imo). By the time they're 15, yes, but by then, many of those kids will have been through more than one academy, so it's a bit misleading to think City 'produced' them - it's a tricky subject though - determining who has contributed most to the development of a player.

The other thing you're missing is that we are talking about the players who aren't rejected... by definition, the ones STILL in the academy are getting to play, but many leave the academy too. We're talking about a child at 9 - what are his ODDS of making it at the highest level? - 1/50,000 maybe. What are the odds of him making it at any professional level? 1/1000 maybe. IF a player goes to City does it increase his odds of making it at any level? or would sticking with Oldham be a better bet?

There's not much evidence to suggest that making City's academy for a year or two, then being dropped by us is any more beneficial - regardless of which other players you played with, or against. Plenty of lads who are 15 and spent most of their time at a lower league academy end up at a PL one anyway, and then go on to make it - because identifying talent at 15 is more reliable than at 9... (but it's still highly speculative).

Agree with some of that. There are more under 25s currently playing in the premier league who spent their high school years at Premier league clubs than those who spent their high school years at football league clubs. For that reason alone you are better playing at a top level club. We offer a full time training programme from the age of 11 and boys will train for round about 20 hours a week. You will be given the best facilities, an excellent education, train with the best players in the country and travel Europe and other continents playing against the best players in the world. We will maximise individual potential up to the age of 16. The problem lies after that age.

 

[The slaughtered lamb]

The cream of world football in their age group is overstating it a bit when you're talking about a 9 year old (imo). By the time they're 15, yes, but by then, many of those kids will have been through more than one academy, so it's a bit misleading to think City 'produced' them - it's a tricky subject though - determining who has contributed most to the development of a player.

The other thing you're missing is that we are talking about the players who aren't rejected... by definition, the ones STILL in the academy are getting to play, but many leave the academy too. We're talking about a child at 9 - what are his ODDS of making it at the highest level? - 1/50,000 maybe. What are the odds of him making it at any professional level? 1/1000 maybe. IF a player goes to City does it increase his odds of making it at any level? or would sticking with Oldham be a better bet?

There's not much evidence to suggest that making City's academy for a year or two, then being dropped by us is any more beneficial - regardless of which other players you played with, or against. Plenty of lads who are 15 and spent most of their time at a lower league academy end up at a PL one anyway, and then go on to make it - because identifying talent at 15 is more reliable than at 9... (but it's still highly speculative).

You may be right that there's little point signing players below a certain age but it depends what your goals are. I seriously doubt we're looking for the next big thing at 9. So why do it? Maybe in a few years time we will be able to identify young talent earlier and I'd rather be at the front of the queue when it happens. Or maybe we want to create a child friendly, world renowned academy, where kids and parents want to come - a bit like social media, be nice to people, get your message out and the rewards will eventually come? Of course identifying talent later on is easier, that goes without saying.

 

[warpig]

Incompetence of the highest order and another PR embarrassment to the club.

 

[Josh_D]

Just domestic youths..we can still plunder the rest of the Earth

This made me laugh.

 

[Marvin]

Even if you'e a cynic and see this as the Premier League gunning for City then why are we allowing ourselves to be caught. We should know everything we do is being scrutinised but the list of infringements is growing:

FFP, drugs tests, and now irregularities in the signing of young players. I wonder if whoever interviews Khaldoon at the end of the season has the bottle to ask him what his managers have been doing

 

[The slaughtered lamb]

Even if you'e a cynic and see this as the Premier League gunning for City then why are we allowing ourselves to be caught. We should know everything we do is being scrutinised but the list of infringements is growing:

FFP, drugs tests, and now irregularities in the signing of young players. I wonder if whoever interviews Khaldoon at the end of the season has the bottle to ask him what his managers have been doing

Can't argue with that. Still don't think it would happen to certain other clubs but it's not like refereeing, where it's spare of the minute stuff is largely out of your control.