M
MearnsUnionist
Guest
Think he'd already played for either a Rest of the World, or European Select side by 19 too.
How old is old enough?
- Thread starter Johnny.mcb
- Start date
Think he'd already played for either a Rest of the World, or European Select side by 19 too.
Al Needham Loyal
Well-Known Member
It's the Scottish mentality where 'getting stuck in' and being strong in every tackle is seen as more important than either reading the game properly so you don't have to tackle, or beating a player with skill/guile.
Its why some on here were crying out for McCrorie to be played over Kamara or Jack not that long ago, and also for Katic over Helander.
Breezer2021
Active Member
Today's society is soft and overprotective and it also encourages laziness and entitlement and that is the reason not many young footballers make the grade nowadays
Abacab
Well-Known Member
You see these young guys at 18/19 getting subbed on in the EPL and they’re all strong laddies.
Lowry will never be a big massive guy as that isn’t his game, but he definitely has to put a bit of muscle on.
You’re hoping we’ve got strength and conditioning/nutritionists working alongside him with a tailored plan for his body.
Lowry will never be a big massive guy as that isn’t his game, but he definitely has to put a bit of muscle on.
You’re hoping we’ve got strength and conditioning/nutritionists working alongside him with a tailored plan for his body.
ao2
Well-Known Member
I take your point in that he didn't play every week but in 1970/71 he played 13 league games (plus 4 as a sub), 2 sub appearances in the Scottish Cup (including scoring the equaliser in the final), that League Cup Final and a sub in the Fairs Cup. In 1971/72 he played 16 league games (plus 1 sub), 7 Scottish Cup, 6 League Cup and 5 Cup-Winners Cup matches (including the final), and by the end of that season he was just 18 1/2. That's good going for one so young. I'm not saying Lowry or any of the other youngsters should get that number of games but age shouldn't be the one thing that stops them either.
Whilst I agree that if you’re good enough, you’re old enough, being good enough at a club like Rangers also requires players being able to handle the pressure that comes with it. Frankly, I’m often disappointed at some of the destructive criticism made on FF, often at older, experienced Rangers players. In today’s world of social media, many younger, less experienced players will struggle to cope with that type of criticism.
Lower level football is full of players considered at that time to be the real deal in their age group but who struggled to make the transition. There are, of course, exceptions but they are few and far between, There are not many Fergusons, Johnstones and Hendersons in Scottish football.
Lower level football is full of players considered at that time to be the real deal in their age group but who struggled to make the transition. There are, of course, exceptions but they are few and far between, There are not many Fergusons, Johnstones and Hendersons in Scottish football.
ABlueDay
Well-Known Member
I agree with a poster that said if your good enough your old enough!
I also think the problem may be that we are expected to win every game and the pressure on our players is higher due to size of club, support at games etc that we can’t take chances that other clubs can with playing younger inexperienced players.
(Other lesser clubs play younger players as they don’t have other options in squad depth to choose from).
How do they get experience if we don’t play them as they can’t go out on loan to a club and get game time at bigger clubs than ours to experience what the pressure will be like.
It is a difficult one that if you get wrong you can ruin a player coming through if he is not mentally strong enough to handle the pressure of criticism that comes with the expectancy to win every game if they don’t get it right in the pitch.
Cup runs and the 5 sub rule could help the manager start to give those younger players game time in hope of achieving a route to the first team football.
I also think the problem may be that we are expected to win every game and the pressure on our players is higher due to size of club, support at games etc that we can’t take chances that other clubs can with playing younger inexperienced players.
(Other lesser clubs play younger players as they don’t have other options in squad depth to choose from).
How do they get experience if we don’t play them as they can’t go out on loan to a club and get game time at bigger clubs than ours to experience what the pressure will be like.
It is a difficult one that if you get wrong you can ruin a player coming through if he is not mentally strong enough to handle the pressure of criticism that comes with the expectancy to win every game if they don’t get it right in the pitch.
Cup runs and the 5 sub rule could help the manager start to give those younger players game time in hope of achieving a route to the first team football.
Dynamo_Queef
Well-Known Member
Not in Scotland and mostly not at Rangers though. People talking shite about "needing games under his belt" first and talking about tough away games at Hibs and Aberdeen. As people on here already said a million times: Messi would have been loaned out to Alloa and to Accrington Stanley for 3 years first before he would even be considered for a first team squad because he would be too wee for the rapid scottish game.
I had a debate on here with a poster who thought Patterson was too young to play regularly. How the hell are youngters meant to improve if they dont play? Its nonsense.
AnglianBear
Well-Known Member
The B team have steamrollered over most of the opposition this season. A lot of the time, in terms of physique, they are having to compete with men nearly twice their age. I think the results show that if you are good enough, you are old enough.
We do. Wright bulked up massively in his first couple of months here.
albop
Well-Known Member
lowry will never be build like bassey and shouldnt be encouraged
he should be giving game time from now on as others have said he played last night like he had been in the team years
until tavs injury last year not many had heard of patterson and he grabbed his chance
hopefully we hang onto this talent longer
he should be giving game time from now on as others have said he played last night like he had been in the team years
until tavs injury last year not many had heard of patterson and he grabbed his chance
hopefully we hang onto this talent longer
Shawlandsloyal
Well-Known Member
I thought I'd logged on to Kerrydale Street by mistake with that title
Orangie
Well-Known Member
Looking at the kid hes light weight and football has changed alot from when Pele was starting out
I'd imagine his body just isn't ready for the rigours of the spfl mostly UFC yet
However he's clearly a talent I'd like to see him on the bench and in the first team squad
I'd imagine his body just isn't ready for the rigours of the spfl mostly UFC yet
However he's clearly a talent I'd like to see him on the bench and in the first team squad
Jimnycricket
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure there's a benefit to full time, albeit early stage professionals, playing teams at a similar level to top amateur clubs.
I would prefer if the first team squad wasn't padded out and academy players played more of a part with the realisation there's a time to sell first team players.
Squad depth has been very important to where we currently are. We’d get nowhere by having the bare bones of a squad being filled with academy players.
Last edited:
Jimnycricket
Well-Known Member
I still feel there's around 4-6 first team players over the last couple of years who have contributed little, where an academy player being in and around the first team would be more beneficial to them in the longer term.
Getting them used to the rigours of men’s football, whilst also playing best v best their age in the UYL has been hugely beneficial.
Ideally they would be playing in league two, but even then they’ve lost 6 games in the lowland league and been tanked twice in the cup by Ayr reserves and Cove.
Academy players are academy players for a reason. They’re learning. They would be nowhere near ready to come into any number of games and circumstances over a season. You can argue some signings haven’t been great but that doesn’t mean an academy player would automatically be better.
One academy player having a good game against Stirling Albion doesn’t mean all academy players will always have a good game against everyone. People need to keep some perspective.
Jimnycricket
Well-Known Member
What about the academy player that came in against Celtic and kept a clean sheet?
The first team players don't have good games against everyone either.
Kelly, McCrorie and before his exit Paterson are crying out for game time.
Carlton The Bear
Well-Known Member
You’re old enough when your manager considers you to be a consistently better option for the position in the team than the player already in it.
Nothing more and nothing less.
In the meantime you get your runouts when you can and try to impress when you do. If your position becomes available through injury or loss of form (and some comes down to good luck and circumstances rather than planning), take the chance.
Nothing more and nothing less.
In the meantime you get your runouts when you can and try to impress when you do. If your position becomes available through injury or loss of form (and some comes down to good luck and circumstances rather than planning), take the chance.
What about him.
One academy player coming in and having a good game doesn’t mean every academy player is going to come in and have a good game.
It would be idiocy for a club like Rangers to have a bare squad and an academy. It’s never going to happen, thankfully.
Johnny Fontane
Well-Known Member
Have you heard of the Manchester Utd team of the mid 90s that was basically built around a core of teenagers and went on to dominate English football for a decade?
dt17
The Jay Cartwright of FF
The whole debate about being "too small" is embarrassing and it's held Scottish football back for decades.
The two best players of all time were about 5ft6 - Messi & Maradona. The all conquering Barca/Spain teams included players such as Xavi, Iniesta, Villa, Alba - all under 5ft7.
Verratti is one of the best midfielders in the world and he's 5ft4!
The two best players of all time were about 5ft6 - Messi & Maradona. The all conquering Barca/Spain teams included players such as Xavi, Iniesta, Villa, Alba - all under 5ft7.
Verratti is one of the best midfielders in the world and he's 5ft4!
Eastern province bear
Well-Known Member
Is the correct answer
Jimnycricket
Well-Known Member
You suggest my argument is based on the strength of one player having a good game on Friday, I've pointed out the last academy player that got a chance did not too bad either.
I've said there's around 4-6 senior players who have contributed next to nothing over the past couple of years, I'm not suggesting that every single back up should be an academy player, I just feel the development is being stifled and we should be looking to promote more players into the first team squad to make the academy worthwhile.
If by 19-20 they aren't good enough to do a job against Ross County or Livingston at home whilst surrounded by international players, I'm not sure if a season or two against Caledonia Braves is going to make a significant difference to their development.
Last edited:
Langsider
Well-Known Member
We're not Man Utd. We don't have access to the kind of talent pool that will see our academy filled with future wonder kids. The game in Scotland is poor, I think we can all agree on that. Scotland isn't going to magically start producing protégés like Beckham and Scholes out of nowhere.
Edit. I'd also add to that the fact that most of our opponants play murder ball. Not the kind if gane that's conducive to the development of young players.
Slickrick
Well-Known Member
Lowry never just came on and did ok. He was head and shoulders above any player in the Rangers team. I have heard dinosaurs saying it was only Stirling. But it was his touch, vision, movement, He was ordering guys about after 2mins and i loved every minute of it.
In Germany 16 and you play for Munich and Dortmund. In Scotland 25 it seems.
In Germany 16 and you play for Munich and Dortmund. In Scotland 25 it seems.
......When I read the headline of the thread,
Dortmund never actually win anything, which is what we are aspiring to do here.
But you’re post is correct, if they are exceptionally talented, have the ability to cope with senior, competitive football and the coaching staff think they’re ready.
That’s the exception to the rule, not the norm and there is this weird misconception on here that every big European team has academy players starting every week.
Let’s see what Gio etc think, I trust them to get it right and hopefully they can get the young guys some minutes going forward.
Bluethruandthru
Well-Known Member
The best compliment I can pay the boy is he made the player he came on to replace look very static indeed. The difference was marked.
The sentence in bold. It’s not only about being a good player. They need to be able to deal with pressure in all different situations and life in general. They’re learning. Players can be ruined by one mistake in the wrong game because fans turn on them.
The fact managers aren’t playing them says they’re not good enough or rounded enough.. And if they’re not good enough we win nothing, yet you want them crowbarred into the team just because they’re there. There’s a reason managers don’t have a bare bones team and an academy, it’s because it wouldn’t work.
Jers
Active Member
Scottish Premiership doesn’t lend itself to throwing youths into games, it’s so physical and competitive.
Does position matter - don’t see many goalkeepers under 20 play in the top leagues.
Though I’m sure top players like Rooney, Messi and Ronaldo could’ve played at 15 but were protected.
Does position matter - don’t see many goalkeepers under 20 play in the top leagues.
Though I’m sure top players like Rooney, Messi and Ronaldo could’ve played at 15 but were protected.
GordonDuriesFirstTouch
Well-Known Member
Ability + physicality should be the deciding factors in blooding a youth player as age is really just a number.
9/10ths ability and sufficient strength to stand up for themselves a bit is all that is required.
Some players can be 22 and a big streak of pish compared to a well filled out 17yo
9/10ths ability and sufficient strength to stand up for themselves a bit is all that is required.
Some players can be 22 and a big streak of pish compared to a well filled out 17yo
Jimnycricket
Well-Known Member
It should only be the wrong game out of necessity and again I'm not saying a bare bones team and then fill it with youth. 22 experienced first team players should be more than enough.
The point you make about fans ruining players is where I think a big part of it lies. There is an undoubted expectation to win every game, which leads to pressure in the dug out. If you're getting that and you have a limited shelf life would you play a raw 18 or 19 year or opt for the older experienced head? It's ingrained in Scottish football, but if you have the balls to play a Nathan Paterson over a Steven O'Donnell or a Billy Gilmour over a Kenny McLean it's amazing what can happen.
The fear and panic in some clubs having to play youth players when covid hits then wanting to postpone games isn't right. That's a no lose chance to blood players and see what they can do. St Mirren did not too bad against Celtic and Dundee Utds young players gave a good account of themselves at Ibrox.
I understand it, i just dont agree with it.
Things have moved now - from the likes of Derek Johnstone day - very very rarely do players at 16/17 break into top level first teams - in recent times you have Bellingham who was play regularly for Birmingham at 15 - Pedri @ Barca playing semi regularly at 18 etc
Even look at Fodden is a sensational talent but only now is a regular week in week out and he made his debut 4 years ago.
As for Lowry he has a real chance - potentially needs to do some conditioning work as looks very slight but a talent in an attacking 1/3rd most certainly.
Even look at Fodden is a sensational talent but only now is a regular week in week out and he made his debut 4 years ago.
As for Lowry he has a real chance - potentially needs to do some conditioning work as looks very slight but a talent in an attacking 1/3rd most certainly.
The expectations at Rangers will always be to win, and if we don’t, they will. That means the manager will always want to win because his job is at risk if we don’t. We won’t get any sort of decent manager coming in when he’s coming with an arm tied behind his back because he’s told he’s having 22 players and an academy.
I watch Rangers to see them win and want them to win trophies. I don’t really understand why some fans would want us not to win just to see academy players in the team. It makes absolutely no sense.
KirkieRanger
Well-Known Member
I was brought up with the philosophy of "If they're good enough then they are old enough"
W.A.T.P.
W.A.T.P.
Jimnycricket
Well-Known Member
You're equating youngsters playing to getting beat.
You don't think 9-10 first teamers and a/couple of youngster(s) chapping on the door should be able to beat Livi, Ross County et al at Ibrox?
Yes, because you’re wanting them in the team regardless whether they’re good enough. If you’re saying they should only be in the team if they’re good enough, that’s exactly what we’re doing so I don’t know what you want to change?
No, we might be able to beat Livingston with them, we might not. We want to win stuff, why would we handicap ourselves?
Jimnycricket
Well-Known Member
The reluctance to play younger players.
There's 21 million reasons to try and find the next Allan Hutton or Nathan Patterson.
Last edited:
We sold Patterson about a week ago after bringing him through while having a decent squad, yet you’re implying we need to change what we do to find another Nathan Patterson.
