The Big "Paucity of English Youth Talent" Debate!

In this specific case I'm not sure wilshere would benefit from playing under Pearce. Playing champions league with arsenal teaches him what the high level is about
The issue is to produce more players like him and mceachran.

 

McEachran is a nobody and has proved nothing.

 

... Typical answer of what's wrong in the general mentality in English football
Its not a matter of proving anything , it's a matter of producing skillful players , and mceachran is definitely one
Being the best player on the pitch against marseille in a CL game at 17 years old is not nothing.
I remember the same kind of comments about wilshere, now he is a starter for arsenal at 18 years old
England needs players with the ability to keep the ball and create. That's the only issue

 

What?? It's the wrong mentality because I am not praising a player who has played 4 Premiership games for Chelsea? What the ******** is wrong with you? We want players the standard of Rooney, Lampard and Ferdinand, we don't do this by hailing McEachran as being a great player and a role model when he has done NOTHING, nothing at all, not even scored a goal.

He's just got good potential. You are mental.

 

I think you'll find that Wenger is moaning about Wilshere being included in both the U21 and the senior squad. I don't believe he has a problem with him playing with either, just not both. And to be honest, he has a point, making young players play too many games in this fashion is going to ultimately harm their careers for both club and country

 

Good post. What exactly is the point of the 21's? To develop players or to win tournaments. Some would argue that it's good to win tournaments together in the youth teams, others would say long term development is more important.

 

First you need to relax a little bit...no need to call me mental because I questioned your post
Did I hail mceachran as a role model ?
The likes of lampard and co are not good enough to win something , so the aim is to produce better. England's inability to keep the ball over the years is the main problem, everybody knows that. I'm not saying mceachran and wilshere will solve all England problems , I'm just saying they are the types of players England need because they both have the ability to get hold of the ball and create things. Will they do it is another question , but at least there is hope. Producing ten new lampard won't change anything, we'll still go to tournaments hailed as favorites and people will be surprised that, as usual, England can't make 3 passes in a row

 

Those aren't mutually exclusive goals .

 

The most important thing is to develop players to succeed in the Senior national team. Winning the World Cup is the aim. Developing players to help us achieve that is the process. Winning the Youth trophies is good for morale etc and a learning experience but it is not the end game. Similar to Reserves at club level, yes you want to win the matches but the aim is to progress into the first team and to achieve success there.

 

They aren't mutually exclusive, however playing someone in both the U21s and the seniors within a short space of time esp. when that player will have had a fairly active season behind them is short term-ism.

Ultimately, we want the seniors to win things. I don't think anyone is going to celebrate the U21s becoming world champions at their level at the expense of the seniors losing in their competitions. If England hasn't got enough players to be competitive at both levels, then need a better solution.

 

Quite ironic you are complaining about a young player getting too many games. The biggest gripes in this Forum is that the young English players are getting too little first team football. It is good experience for Wilshire imo, it will mean he will develop faster to his full potential.

 

Wrong, its more likely to cause burnout or an injury.

 

Is there any other young player that has played/going to play as many games as Wilshere, that is eligible for the 21's and is likely to play in Euro 2012?

Genuine question.

 

By playing in the 21's after a long season when he is likely to be tired?

What Wenger is saying is that he has surpassed the 21's. He is a regular for Arsenal at 18 years old. Playing may help him with off the field issues at future tournaments such as being away for weeks, staying in hotels etc.

I would prefer him to be with Arsenal in Austria in the summer, getting a full pre-season.

Plenty of other countries including the US, hold training camps throughout the year. No matches, just training. A week here, three days there etc. These would be as beneficial to team spirit, getting familiar with each other etc.

 

I do believe there are these things called medics. These guys assess the physical state of a player and prevent a player from playing if his physical condition prevents it. Even Arsenal have them apparently.

I doubt the 7 minutes Wilshere played for England 5 months ago is really going to burn out a teenager. If Wenger thought he was in danger of burnout then he would have played him in 25 matches this season.

 

Yes medics and sport science research. Hence the reason Wenger wouldn't want Wilshere to play.

In 2009 he played 17 times for Arsenal and Bolton. So far he has started 25 games for Arsenal. That should easily go up to at least 40. You then want him to play for the 21's in the summer. Miss the most important part of pre-season. Play again at least 40 games in the following season (If he's not injured!). Then play in Euro 2012, and again not get a proper rest or pre-season, and then play a full season again.

So by May 2013 he will at 20/21 years old be completely burned out. How about we find another tournament for him to play in?

Not everyone's a workhorse like Rooney or Milner. Wilshere isn't an athlete, he's an elegant player that needs to be protected, both on the pitch (from rough challenges) and off the pitch (i.e recovery time).

Wasn't fitness and tiredness an issue with our players in the World Cup?

 

The chances of that happen, because of a set of core players, say 3-6 maximum, is very low indeed. So I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.

 

You are assuming that he plays 40 games a season for 2 consecutive seasons. I should perhaps point out that there is only 1 current Arsenal midfielder who has ever done that and not for a number of seasons now - Fabregas.

England have no interest in damaging Wilshere's career. It is not for Wenger to decide on the selection of England U-21 sides. Let's not assume that Wilshere is going to Euro2012 either.

 

There hasn't been a midfield player over the past few years as key as Wilshere since Fabregas came through.

England want what's best for England. Why hasn't Rooney played for England U21's? I would class Wilshere in the same type of category as Rooney at the same age.

If we are not assuming that an injury free Wilshere is going to Euro 2012 then what hope have we got. Is there a better English central midfielder at the moment?

 

Have we qualified for 2012? Has Wilshere cemented his place in the England lineup? The answer to both of these questions is - no.

18 months is a long time in football. Players can come through, break a leg, lose form, lose their place. Talk of Euro2012 squad, and Wilshere is premature.

 

I think you're misunderstanding the situation. Wenger is concerned that Wilshere may play for both the U21s and the seniors next summer. Its nothing to do with previous matches for England.

Wilshere has started 22 games this season, and come on as sub 3 times, so he is certainly on course, esp. when you consider he's missed games because of a red card.
I would think it's highly likely that Wilshere will be involved with the full England squad.

That's nothing to do with it. It's not whether Wilshere joins up with the full squad or the U21s, it's the fact that there were suggestions that if picked for the full squad Wilshere could ALSO be picked for the U21s games at a similar time.

It should be either / or, not both.

 

My point is you can't say he is 'this type of player' or 'gets hold of the ball and creates things.' He has played 4 Premiership games, you are heaping praise on him that he has not even come close to proving. I am fine with Wilshere being mentioned because he is actually on the road to proving himself and he's doing a ********ing good job. McEachran... No.

 

Yes but at the moment it is not both is it? It is only potentially both. It might turn out to be neither. If it turns out to be both then whinge about it then but not fr1cking 18 months in advance.

 

Of course, but it wasn't Wenger that brought it up, he didn't start it. He didn't say that Wilshere shouldn't play for both sides until someone else, Brooking and Pearce I believe said that they wanted the player to be available to play for both sides one, after the other, he was simplyresponding their suggestion.

As I've shown above, Wilshere has been getting plenty of games and barring injuries will continue to do so, certainly enough to 'develop to his full potential' as you put it. Wenger (nor I for that matter) has no issue with Wilshere playing for either the seniors or the U21s, it's the suggestion that he should play a full season for his team, (which incidentally pays his wages) then play for the seniors, then play for the U21s directly afterwards. As his employer, Wenger has every right to bring up his concerns over his employee and player.

 

Wenger is entitled to make any comments he wants about Wilshere. My complaint is about Arsenal fans whinging about Wilshere's possible burnout for the next 18 months and derailing this thread. Complaining about something that hasn't happened and may never happen is just a little unnecessary. Club managers always complain about their player playing for their countries. This thread does not need to be filled with parroting of their complaints. This is the England forum, we are looking at the players from an England perspective.

We get it. If Wilshere plays more than any other Arsenal midfield player in the next 2 years and all the U-21 matches in the next 2 years and all the England senior matches then he may get burned out or injured. That is one hypothetical situation.

Another one is that Ramsay comes back and displaces Wilshere in the Arsenal team. Wilshere goes out on loan somewhere in order to get more minutes. Another hypothetical situation is that Fabregas leaves in the summer and Hazard comes in. This leads to Wilshere's playing time being completely different from predictions made 6 months earlier. Another one is Wilshere gets arrested again and is dropped by Capello. Another one is Nasri falls out with Wilshere resulting in Wenger sending Wilshere out on loan. Another is Jerome Thomas puts in a bad tackle on Wilshere and breaks his leg.

This thread does not need 18 months of complaining about Wilshere hypothetically getting burned out due to that evil FA. If he does indeed get misused by the FA and burned out or injured through negligence then you can complain for the following 18 months. At this moment in time, WIlshere has not played 80 consecutive games for Arsenal and been burned out due to the FA. So complaints about this happening are premature.

No England fan in this forum wants Wilshere to be damaged or harmed. We want him to do well for England and develop into his full potential. There is no indication that this is being jeopardised by the FA.