Joined: May 11 2003 Posts: 1707 Location: back yard
Bet Lynch wrote:I do not disagree with AP tbh, the scouting for FC was shocking the U18s were chosen at 12yrs old!! and they were never really interested in any other players even at 16s they would come and watch the academy kids at club level and 9 times out of 10 there were better players on the pitch and they simply were not interested in them or what the club coaches had to say, thankfully all that changed when AP took over but like he said we will have to wait for the 16s and there are some fantastic prospects in that age group.
I hope you are right. The only odd thing of note is that after all the years of poor scouting one of the first things AP did was bring the retired chief scout back to the club.
"Be you ever so high, the law is above you"
"No one has ever made himself great by showing how small someone else is". - Irvin Himmel
Joined: Feb 20 2007 Posts: 10540 Location: Hunting Gopher
Staffs FC wrote:I'm not sure where he said that anyone didn't have a future ? He highlighted a strong 16s level and why shouldn't he if that's in fact the case. He didn't say that all other players in other groups didn't have a future in the same way he didn't name every player in the 16s and say they did. If a player is getting a first team chance then they are likely seen as having potential regardless of which age group they are from. If they're not then they're probably not good enough.
I was delighted that Pearson talked about ring-fencing our strongest young prospects. Exactly what I wanted to hear.
I haven't heard exactly what he said, so maybe it was fine. That's why I asked the poster if that's what he actually said, as the poster said that he said the next players to come through would be from the 16s. If that's how he really did word it then he's essentially said that none of the 18s or 20s will, which is kind of a knock to them IMO.
Like I say, maybe he didn't quite say it like that so I won't condemn him for it until I know for sure, I'm just saying that it's rarely a good motivational tool for the head of a business to say that his staff are sh*t, whether directly or indirectly.
Joined: Feb 12 2005 Posts: 13126 Location: East Staffordshire
carl_spackler wrote:I haven't heard exactly what he said, so maybe it was fine. That's why I asked the poster if that's what he actually said, as the poster said that he said the next players to come through would be from the 16s. If that's how he really did word it then he's essentially said that none of the 18s or 20s will, which is kind of a knock to them IMO.
Like I say, maybe he didn't quite say it like that so I won't condemn him for it until I know for sure, I'm just saying that it's rarely a good motivational tool for the head of a business to say that his staff are sh*t, whether directly or indirectly.
Make your own mind up mate link below - basically I heard his point as being that we were having to plug gaps with signings around the 20-22 age due to not having enough home grown quality at that age. He wasn't keen on joining forces with KR unless we could ring fence our talented 16s. Even then he didn't sound overly keen - seems like it's an RFL idea. I suspect his counterpart across the river is more accommodating to the whole wheeze.
carl_spackler wrote:I haven't heard exactly what he said, so maybe it was fine. That's why I asked the poster if that's what he actually said, as the poster said that he said the next players to come through would be from the 16s. If that's how he really did word it then he's essentially said that none of the 18s or 20s will, which is kind of a knock to them IMO.
Like I say, maybe he didn't quite say it like that so I won't condemn him for it until I know for sure, I'm just saying that it's rarely a good motivational tool for the head of a business to say that his staff are sh*t, whether directly or indirectly.
Make your own mind up mate link below - basically I heard his point as being that we were having to plug gaps with signings around the 20-22 age due to not having enough home grown quality at that age. He wasn't keen on joining forces with KR unless we could ring fence our talented 16s. Even then he didn't sound overly keen - seems like it's an RFL idea. I suspect his counterpart across the river is more accommodating to the whole wheeze.
Graham Richards wrote:I hope you are right. The only odd thing of note is that after all the years of poor scouting one of the first things AP did was bring the retired chief scout back to the club.
When we were involved it was rarely the chief scout who came to local games tbh, it was a young kid who they sent and tbh he did not have much of a clue, we were once in a cup game and he was asked to name a MOM he picked one of his academy players who only played 20 minutes all game and was far from the best, even more embarrassing he said it was between him and his other academy player who was also no where mom, the crowd just stood silent with their mouths open. KR were by far the best scouts in this city at that age group they would turn up to lots of different games whereas you were lucky to see any-one from FC, maybe twice a season at best even though topped our league all season. Also worth noting is FC academy players were not allowed to play at club level at 17s although all other Yorkshire SL clubs allowed their academy players to play up to the Xmas so went approx 6 months before a game, FC 18s went over 12 months without a game!
Staffs FC wrote:Make your own mind up mate link below - basically I heard his point as being that we were having to plug gaps with signings around the 20-22 age due to not having enough home grown quality at that age. He wasn't keen on joining forces with KR unless we could ring fence our talented 16s. Even then he didn't sound overly keen - seems like it's an RFL idea. I suspect his counterpart across the river is more accommodating to the whole wheeze.
Makes me wonder if something has happened in the last week or 2 to change his stance. Not so long back he was seemingly advocating it and hudge said last week an announcement was imminent.
Hope it doesn't happen personally
Staffs FC wrote:Make your own mind up mate link below - basically I heard his point as being that we were having to plug gaps with signings around the 20-22 age due to not having enough home grown quality at that age. He wasn't keen on joining forces with KR unless we could ring fence our talented 16s. Even then he didn't sound overly keen - seems like it's an RFL idea. I suspect his counterpart across the river is more accommodating to the whole wheeze.
Makes me wonder if something has happened in the last week or 2 to change his stance. Not so long back he was seemingly advocating it and hudge said last week an announcement was imminent.
Joined: Feb 20 2007 Posts: 10540 Location: Hunting Gopher
Staffs FC wrote:Make your own mind up mate link below - basically I heard his point as being that we were having to plug gaps with signings around the 20-22 age due to not having enough home grown quality at that age. He wasn't keen on joining forces with KR unless we could ring fence our talented 16s. Even then he didn't sound overly keen - seems like it's an RFL idea. I suspect his counterpart across the river is more accommodating to the whole wheeze.
Cheers, I've listened to it all now. He doesn't actually include our 20s with what he's saying, but I do think he was being a bit harsh to our 18s, he basically wrote them off. I appreciate that he was bigging up our 16s, and he may even be right about the fact that we need to plug the gap between them and the 20s, but to announce on local radio that an entire age group are not good enough to make it and by extension basically just filling a requirement for us as a club to put out a team at that age group can't be good for them to hear. They must now wonder what the point in being with us is if they are only biding time until being released.
Staffs FC wrote:Make your own mind up mate link below - basically I heard his point as being that we were having to plug gaps with signings around the 20-22 age due to not having enough home grown quality at that age. He wasn't keen on joining forces with KR unless we could ring fence our talented 16s. Even then he didn't sound overly keen - seems like it's an RFL idea. I suspect his counterpart across the river is more accommodating to the whole wheeze.
Cheers, I've listened to it all now. He doesn't actually include our 20s with what he's saying, but I do think he was being a bit harsh to our 18s, he basically wrote them off. I appreciate that he was bigging up our 16s, and he may even be right about the fact that we need to plug the gap between them and the 20s, but to announce on local radio that an entire age group are not good enough to make it and by extension basically just filling a requirement for us as a club to put out a team at that age group can't be good for them to hear. They must now wonder what the point in being with us is if they are only biding time until being released.
carl_spackler wrote:Cheers, I've listened to it all now. He doesn't actually include our 20s with what he's saying, but I do think he was being a bit harsh to our 18s, he basically wrote them off. I appreciate that he was bigging up our 16s, and he may even be right about the fact that we need to plug the gap between them and the 20s, but to announce on local radio that an entire age group are not good enough to make it and by extension basically just filling a requirement for us as a club to put out a team at that age group can't be good for them to hear. They must now wonder what the point in being with us is if they are only biding time until being released.
I must admit I can't understand what he's getting at, especially when you consider James Cunningham is from that age group.
Tarquin Fuego wrote: I love Jamie and have done since he was 10 years old.
The Reason wrote:Hi Andy
The Rugby Football League are in the process of reviewing the video that you are referring to. We do not condone behaviour of this nature and have contacted the player’s employer, Hull F.C., who have confirmed that they are dealing with the incident under their club rules.
Joined: Jul 15 2005 Posts: 29796 Location: West Yorkshire
Jake the Peg wrote:Makes me wonder if something has happened in the last week or 2 to change his stance. Not so long back he was seemingly advocating it and hudge said last week an announcement was imminent.
Hope it doesn't happen personally
Wondered that too. Hudge's usual snide comments about the Watts transfer characterise how he goes about his business whilst AP is trying to put the relationship at a more mature level. So many issues in this, from funding to draft system. Would much prefer we operated our own tbh.
Sheldon wrote:I must admit I can't understand what he's getting at, especially when you consider James Cunningham is from that age group.
He might have meant in this kind of volume. We've got Bowden, Kent, Green, Nicklas, Crooks and to some extent Lyne through the 20's this year. Maybe he feels there's only one or two in the 18's? And the next crop of half a dozen is in the 16's.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
