Jump to content

 

 

Six Called For Scots U18s


Recommended Posts

To comapre Man Utd in England to Rangers in Scotland is complete nonesense.

 

In Scotland there are at most half a dozen teams with any reasonable youth budget competing for a small pool of players.

 

In England there is around 50 clubs that spend significant sums on their youth setup and the pool of players is much bigger, which is reflected in the fact that Scotland very rarely even get even a draw against England at youth level. Clubs like Crystal Palace spend more than any Scottish club with the exception of the old firm.

 

Also up until this season there was a rule that English clubs could only sign youth players within 1 hours travel of the club, meaning Man Utd couldn't sign anyone from London for example. Of the 36 players that Man Utd have in their academy 19 are not English, and 13 of these players have been capped at youth level by their country. Of the 17 that are English 9 have been capped at youth level. Three were purchased from lower league clubs in the last year.

 

This is reflected across all the big clubs as they cast the net wider, Scottish teams youth sides are 90%+ Scottish.

 

At what time did I say all our youth should be starters for the national sides ? But I do expect us to be the best in Scotland and the moment we are know where near that. 17's are good and the younger ages are very good if they can avoid the Sinky cull. Inverness Caley Thistle completed the double over our under 15's today a 3-2 win at Murray Park adding to their earlier win in the highlands. All due respect to Inverness Caley but Rangers shouldn't be losing to them at any under age level. To use your Man Utd comparison, its like them losing consecutive game to an Accrington Stanley side.

 

Can Rangers take players from all over the country? Are there any rules similar to the one hour one in England.

 

Also your "small pool of players" comment can also count against us. There aren't that many decent players to pick up out of Scotland and it is unreasonable to expect any team to have a great majority when they are only 1 team out of 42. Be they the biggest club or not.

 

"At what time did I say all our youth should be starters for the national sides ?" It is inferred by the point about other clubs players being ahead of ours in the national squads.

 

Just because a boy at Hearts makes an u17 squad ahead of a player we have of the same age and position does not mean the jambo is guaranteed to have the better career.

 

I admit some of the analogies there are not perfect and taken in isolation can easily be picked apart. The point I was making is that just because we let a player go who then plays for ICT for example and gets into national teams, does not mean we made a mistake.

 

If we let a forward go because he couldn't get a game ahead of Prso or Jelavic for example, but he latterly plays well enough to get Scotland caps it does not mean that the wrong decision was made at the time we made it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No restriction in Scotland only limit woukd be travelling for the player, so someone in from Aberdeen may not what to travel to Glasgow, but by the same token the reverese is true, but Abderdeen managed to sign Craig Storrie one of the best u17 players and he is from Carluke.

 

You seriously think Rangers are competeing with another 41 clubs for youth players ? How many scouts would Rangers have compared to Killie, St.Mirren or Motherwell ? Never mind your Elgin, Berwick and Clyde's. Even Hearts have pulled out from the West of Scotland due to cash.

 

Of cousre being selected for international side taken individually means little, but when the biggest club in the country has less than 5 or 6 other clubs there is a reason, genereally its because they are not very good.

 

Nobody I am talking about was released because of Jelavic or Prso, that is total nonesense, it is YOUTH players. The players I am refering to were released at 13,14, 15 & 16 so were never a threat to the first team. This is were your youth department and coaches are supposed to come in. They are supposed to spot that potential. Falkirk seen the potential of Murray Wallace, so much so a club that were skint paid Rangers a development fee for him, two years later they sold him for 300k. A club that seems to know what they are doing, as I said totally skint, but they found the money to pay a development fee for Ryan McGeever from Queen's Park in the summer. Watch for him being sold at a significant profit in the next couple of years, our lot have paid development fees only to release them ONE year later.

 

These players that have left have progressed after leaving Rangers and I have said its not 2 or 3 but its now beyond double figures. Our u20's lost 5-1 to a Kilmarnock side in the youth cup, a Killie side that included 3 players Sinclair released, it wasn't a narrow defeat 5-1 and could have been more.

 

If you really think we don't have a few issues go to Murray Park and watch them, then tell me you still think all is rosey.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your are going to make a comparison then at least do it properly and don't pick one age group to suit your argument. Rangers best age groups are U17 & U18 and we are on a par with Celtic at these ages and games would be close. 6 to 2 isn't really a true reflection as two of Celtic's players from this age group are in the U19's squad, playing a year up.

 

The 17's squad is announced also and the stats are 7 to 3 the other way.

 

A proper picture is when you look at the latest squads selected from U16's through to U21's.

 

Rangers have had 13 selected, an average of 2.6 per squad. Celtic have had 28 an average of 5.6 per squad.

 

Another damning stat is that there have been 12 players selected who were previously at Rangers. So an average 2.4 either released or bought by another club. We got fees for Rhys McCabe, Dylan McGeough and Joe Thompson, the others were released.

 

A bit about each player, Fraser I'm sure you all know

 

Blair Currie - Pretty sure he is an 1994 so a year older, been at Rangers since a young age, Played a few 1st team games for Hamilton when on loan last season. Contact up at the end of the season, heard recently its not getting renewed.

 

Stuart Urquhart - Left sided footballing centre-back who came from Hamilton Accies, occasionally features in midfield. Was injured at the start of the season since coming back has got quite a few reserve games.

 

Andy Murdoch - Been at Rangers quite a few years and captained various age groups, anchorman in midfield and occasionaly played a right back.

 

Darren Ramsay - Another who has been at the club since a young age, played centre back at younger age groups. Now a fixture in midfield and an all round midfielder.

 

Charlie Telfer - Been at Rangers eight years since coming through the Rangers soccer schools, a skillful creative midfielder who can see a pass. Highly rated by Mark Wotte. I believe his contract is up at the end of the season.

 

I didn't pick any age group to suit my argument, indeed I didn't make an argument. I made a flippant post as this thread was started whilst I was involved in a 'youth discussion' on another thread.

 

As a matter of interest what's the correlation between representing Scotland at youth level and say representing Scotland at senior full international level? Has anyone ever worked out if youth internationalists are more or less likely to become full internationals or indeed full-time professionals? It isn't a question aimed at you just a general question of everyone. Other than prestige is there any demonstrable benefit in being a youth international?

 

The Republic of Ireland, with similar population and arguably fewer resources than Scotland finished third at the Fifa Youth World Cup in 1997. Of that squad, probably the most successful ROI side ever, only one player, Damien Duff, had what you could describe as a successful career. Indeed almost all except Duff spent their careers in the League of Ireland or non-league English football. Of the Scotland under-19 squad who lost the final of the European championship to Spain in 2006 about half of them have made a career in football. 2 are with English Premier League clubs and 2 playing in the SPL, the remainder are at lower levels than that. Lee Wallace is obviously with us and should be considered of SPL standard at least. But again that squad has under-delivered, in terms of the potential it showed back then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't pick any age group to suit my argument, indeed I didn't make an argument. I made a flippant post as this thread was started whilst I was involved in a 'youth discussion' on another thread.

 

As a matter of interest what's the correlation between representing Scotland at youth level and say representing Scotland at senior full international level? Has anyone ever worked out if youth internationalists are more or less likely to become full internationals or indeed full-time professionals? It isn't a question aimed at you just a general question of everyone. Other than prestige is there any demonstrable benefit in being a youth international?

 

The Republic of Ireland, with similar population and arguably fewer resources than Scotland finished third at the Fifa Youth World Cup in 1997. Of that squad, probably the most successful ROI side ever, only one player, Damien Duff, had what you could describe as a successful career. Indeed almost all except Duff spent their careers in the League of Ireland or non-league English football. Of the Scotland under-19 squad who lost the final of the European championship to Spain in 2006 about half of them have made a career in football. 2 are with English Premier League clubs and 2 playing in the SPL, the remainder are at lower levels than that. Lee Wallace is obviously with us and should be considered of SPL standard at least. But again that squad has under-delivered, in terms of the potential it showed back then.

 

Interesting post with some good points and the middle paragraph is part of what my argument has been about but written far more succinctly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

These players that have left have progressed after leaving Rangers and I have said its not 2 or 3 but its now beyond double figures. Our u20's lost 5-1 to a Kilmarnock side in the youth cup, a Killie side that included 3 players Sinclair released, it wasn't a narrow defeat 5-1 and could have been more.

 

If you really think we don't have a few issues go to Murray Park and watch them, then tell me you still think all is rosey.

 

Really no offense meant, but you do seem to cherry pick people and games (Nov 25th?) here. I can't say that I watched the youth people, but neither am I willing to follow the opinion of one (sic!) boarder who does. For fans have never been an impartial or objective breed of people - me very much included. It looks that you are utterly unimpressed by what is going on right now at at certain levels at Auchenhowie and made your point. Whether it is to remain the way you see it or change to the better is very much open for debate though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No restriction in Scotland only limit woukd be travelling for the player, so someone in from Aberdeen may not what to travel to Glasgow, but by the same token the reverese is true, but Abderdeen managed to sign Craig Storrie one of the best u17 players and he is from Carluke.

 

You seriously think Rangers are competeing with another 41 clubs for youth players ? How many scouts would Rangers have compared to Killie, St.Mirren or Motherwell ? Never mind your Elgin, Berwick and Clyde's. Even Hearts have pulled out from the West of Scotland due to cash.

 

Of cousre being selected for international side taken individually means little, but when the biggest club in the country has less than 5 or 6 other clubs there is a reason, genereally its because they are not very good.

 

Nobody I am talking about was released because of Jelavic or Prso, that is total nonesense, it is YOUTH players. The players I am refering to were released at 13,14, 15 & 16 so were never a threat to the first team. This is were your youth department and coaches are supposed to come in. They are supposed to spot that potential. Falkirk seen the potential of Murray Wallace, so much so a club that were skint paid Rangers a development fee for him, two years later they sold him for 300k. A club that seems to know what they are doing, as I said totally skint, but they found the money to pay a development fee for Ryan McGeever from Queen's Park in the summer. Watch for him being sold at a significant profit in the next couple of years, our lot have paid development fees only to release them ONE year later.

 

These players that have left have progressed after leaving Rangers and I have said its not 2 or 3 but its now beyond double figures. Our u20's lost 5-1 to a Kilmarnock side in the youth cup, a Killie side that included 3 players Sinclair released, it wasn't a narrow defeat 5-1 and could have been more.

 

If you really think we don't have a few issues go to Murray Park and watch them, then tell me you still think all is rosey.

 

I have never said we don't have problems or that everything is rosey.

 

All along i've merely argued the fact that players we let go playing for a Scotland national side is not, in itself, enough proof to say we wrong to let them go.

 

I fully agree we have issues with our youth set up. I worked in the Falkirk set up for a little while as an S+C coach.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I obviously wrong and don't understand what I'm watching, strange I don't remember seeing any of you at Murray Park on a regular basis. So I'll bow to your superior knowledge on players you've never seen.

 

Mate, I can say it again ... your opinion is appreciated. You are neither wrong nor does anyone state something to the contrary of your statements. But you should also accept that people will make up their own minds and that mind will not solely based on one person's view, opinion, and experience.

 

@gunslinger .. you can do better than that. The truth is that elfideldo states what he perceives is going on, puts it into a frame and backs it up with IMHO selected facts. Yet, we - as opposed to Killie - saw potential in McKay and signed him up. Was that a lucky break from "the norm" or our scouts seeing more in him than some of our players they released? The crux remains that the rest of "us" get clubbed with all those fine players who made a breakthrough after leaving Rangers or rather: were send away. To have a comparison though you would ask how many of those released did not make it over the years, and how many folk released by other teams made their mark with us. So far this reads like a one-way-street: Rangers setup is bad, Rangers coaches are bad, always have been, always will be. And if you point that out, you cannot handle the truth? Well, well ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

To claim that Killie didn't see any potential in MacKay is simply preposterous, they released him because of the medical advice they received that indicated a chronic hip problem but don't let the truth spoil your fantasy.

 

They're not the first club to have released a player due to bum medical advice are they?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.