This is not really an argument. Its one oerson knowing what they are talking about v. one who hasn’t a clue
“It’s important to avoid focusing on just a small group of talents and thus discounting a large bulk of talented youngsters.”
Just an example of how utterly different this system is to Irelands.
And the players stay with their clubs and it starts at 11. So rocko is all over the shop. Still 11 is too young and rejection is still an issue for potential drop out of potential future elite (if thats what you aim is). The Germans do though keep a much broader net than anything on these islands.
You want the leagues organised by divisions for each level of talent. Therefore you want players at a certain talent level at certain clubs. I didn’t advocate for that. You did.
They’re advertising on a Facebook page for the league because that’s where people will look who want their kid to play football. I doubt any of them are advertising exclusively there. Those are small clubs - they’re not trying to get people from all over Dublin playing for them.
I don’t think you’ve a clue what you’re talking about here. You have no evidence to rely on other than your own misinterpretation of a couple of harmless advertisements looking for more kids to play sport.
Here you go:
There’s some proof in there that talent identification starts at 8. If you’re looking for proof that their model is successful then you’re just refusing to accept blatant truths.
I never said i want divisions of leafues based on individual talent. On collective talent. As is the norm. So stop making things up. I was very clear in that. I want kids to play lically.
Its starts at 11 according to their own organisation papers.
But if course it means nothing. Not to mention its a newspaper article
Because you will never, ever be able to produce a shread of evidence that any pre-pubecent system works. Because they don’t.
There is absolutely no way of knowing. None. Nobody has ever shown it. You cannot predict future ability before puberty with any great surity. All that has traditionally happened is many many get excluded pre puberty.
Germany do alot of things well, but their success has zero to do with pretending to develop elite 11 year olds, or even 8 year olds. Critically many of their players stay playing with local clubs and avoid academies
What i do know is people involved in clubs and that league. Some 8 and 9 year olds are crossing the city to play with teams and this is a growing trend. It gets worse as they get older. If you go to my facebook or any of the twotter discussion on this subject you will find plenty people directly involved. And indeed media who are happy to jump up and down about MON tunning away from this.
I only put up a few samples. The page is full of this shite.
From what I’ve seen the teams look at the players and split them evenly to ensure they have 2 or more balanced teams where applicable. The leagues are then split into divisions on geography. Your position is that you want teams to be organised based on ability but you haven’t proposed how that will be done. The only way to do it is to assess ability, individual or collective.
Well the Germans seem to place some stock in what they’re doing. I didn’t realise you knew better than the German youth coaches as well as me. It seems like they’re wasting an awful lot of effort and achieving a lot of coincidental but entirely unrelated success. I’m sure they’d love to hear from you on how they can better organise their resources. You can recommend they stop training all their coaches too like you did before!
The samples you put up were shit examples to be perfectly honest. They spoke about facilities, fun, enjoyment, equal playing opportunities, equal playing time etc.
And you concluded that this was “stealing state funds.” .
Sure of course they are going to throw out that runbish. Maybe they have facilities etc. But the reality on the ground is much dufferent. Go talk to the people involved. They will tell you what its really about. You want to willfully ignore this point and that pount is being made publically.
Clubs stay locally based. Graded on numbers registered. Made bring up standards. Firces lazy clubs who steal players to buck up. I believe there are guidelines in relation to players playing with lical clubs that are completely ignored.
German success is of course because of hard work, but yes totally co-incidental to working with 8 year olds.
Like Dublin they have big numbers and got organised. But their model is not ideal nor perfect completely. Few rarely are, but the u13 “elite” nonsense is a waste of time. Thats a fact.
You don’t understand the science underpinning this so i should not expect you tonunderstand.
Typical accountant b&w outlook.
This is what they did. This is the result. It must work perfectly.
Firstly. That’s a highly entertaining rant. Misspellings, malapropisms, invented words, poor comprenehsion… it has the lot.
Secondly. I’ve no idea what the “spoke of” is in reference to.
This is probably my favourite section from your post. Because you’re now completely ignoring the very advertisements you were complaining about in the first place. You posted them like some sort of shocking example of “stealing funds” and “whoring.” You figured out early enough that you misunderstood the “size” piece. Now you’ve figured out that they were actually fairly balanced in what they said about facilities and enjoyment etc.
So the advertisements that you were complaining about are actually fine. It’s the sinister behaviour “on the ground” which is much different and the real problem.
That’s fine. It’s a completely different argument though. You go and complain about that stuff to yourself. The “evidence” you provided fell apart.
Again, nothing to do with the advertisements you posted.
Your passion shines through though and makes your argument impossible to follow. Your list starts as a recommendation I assume (clubs staying local, grading on numbers. But then three points into your list it seems to be a criticism (Fierce(?) lazy clubs, stealing players). All in all, it’s just a list of phrases: some positive, some negative, none relevant, most misspelled.
“That’s a fact.” Of course it is. Germany are just like Dublin
You don’t understand so I don’t expect you to understand! Your argument on that point might be a touch circular! This is what the phrase begging the question was coined for.
You have an enormous chip on your shoulder about soccer coaching. It was abundantly clear when you argued about Jim McGuinness not needing qualifications.
It was abundantly clear when you found offence in harmless Facebook posts.
It was abundantly clear when you conceded that the posts might have been fine but you were in fact talking about something on the ground which is much different! You actually went and told us the point you were making was “much different” to the very point you made in the first place!