derry

I don't really have any disagreements, there are all sorts of views, however I think we have the chosen path of the club to live with at this time. I'm not into perfect scenarios, we have only what the management have decided to do. It would be nice to bring through talent and have enough GOOD players to help them out. That would be ideal in the circumstances. I just happen to think that whilst not ideal, looking on the positive side, the consequences could produce better recruitment in the future. I do however like the type of football they play. I also think they will, given a few positive results, improve immeasureably.

Maybe best to wait and see how this pans out, as your crystal ball is no better than mine.

Go to the injuries page of the team section OS. I think Thomas has a bad knee injury.

You are a sad individual. It was in the Echo at 0700, changed during the day and went on the OS about 1800.

Exactly.

That's why possibly more of them, could find their way here in the future, as a consquence of the club policy.

Same 11 Ron, but for me McGoldrick was AWOL from wide right. I wouldn't consider him there, he has no discipline, it unbalanced the team. That leaves Lallana to play wide and McGoldrick behind Pekart. Otherwise I would leave him out and play Dyer or Thompson wide right.

It may well have been that we only produced the players that reached the first team. If more had been given the chance in a younger team we might have more playing now. Blackstock, mills, Cranie, Best for example. They were all on the periphary but hardly ever picked.

As I've said before I'm not talking about players at the club, I'm talking about the perception of parents seeing enhanced opportunity because of the club's present policy. As a consequence, if parents want their sons to come here before 17 there is damn all other clubs can do about it, as long as we don't poach them.

Maybe true, it's not a plan, just a perceived possible consequence. If I was a parent and could see a 30/50% chance of playing first team football and if good enough a transfer, rather than a possible 5% chance I know where my son would go.

Who knows. It has been a massive money spinner. £30m - £35m in the last 3 years.

The little choice is because that is the chosen path. If they change direction it's another scenario.

I'm talking about 15/16 year old recruits not yet at the club, pre contract youngsters, and young professional quality recruits loan/ permanent in the shorter term. Not the present incumbents in the academy. It is the ability to recruit better quality youngsters through the perception of a better chance to succeed.

Interesting point, deserves a thread of it's own.

We are playing them, if they survive and come through, then we would certainly be better off than the traditional way. As there is little choice it may be a side effect of playing a lot of youngsters.

I'm not talking now, but what the present could lead to. Access to quality on the back of greater opportunity.

And lucrative, we were never going to keep them all. The more quality players we produce, the better the team and the greater the income. If promotion was on the cards more could stay. At least that's the theory.

Just an thought. Usually clubs develop maybe one even two players in a season sometimes none at all. If we managed to bring through say 5 or 6 with others queuing up to play, that could really work in our favour. Once word gets out that we are getting a lot of youngsters into the first team, it could be, that high quality youngsters/parents will see the odds on their sons making it shorten, and want to come here. Also players like Pekart/Cork etc.

Didn't have the same spin you put on it. Seemed pretty reasonable except for difficult to stop. Maybe in time if the team stays together.

Dyer has to do it and isn't, for me that indicates there isn't an emphasis on knocking the ball well past the defender and running him. Dribbleing up to the defender and trying to trick him just allows the cover to get in touch and doubleteam. It completely negates his pace. I will say however that he needs to add the option to his tactics, not just replace one move for another. Both options would make him difficult to play against.

I think Cork is a solid defender if a little short in the air. I would prefer him at full back. However in defence of James, Thompson gave him cover, White and McGoldrick didn't. Svennson covers him but the other CBs didn't. This is all part of team play. Being isolated with the nearest cover 30 yds away makes a defender pretty easy to beat if the players are quick.

The Echo is saying JP is considering BWP, Schneiderlin, Pekart, to play together with Svennson who has been given the all clear by the surgeon and is fit.

You might have been in a position to verify Lowe's acceptance, to me it was rumour with a thousand others. Your last paragraph is just about where I am coming from. As I am in no position to know, is Lowe actively chasing investment/the sale of the club?

Because I like their style and commitment, yes and yes, at least 2 tickets.

One of the players in a team I coached was approx 27 years old, a recent GB Olympic sprinter, faster than Walcott or Dyer. He was a pretty good footballer. It took me a while to convince him by demonstration that he was nowhere near as quick dribbling the ball. Once he had taken this on board, he read the defenders cover and hit the ball as far past the defender as needed, sometimes running three defenders with his pace. By using one/twos and diagonal through balls he was almost unplayable. Dyer has pace but it is not being used effectively, that is down to the coaches and the co-operation of his team mates.