FA Youth Cup: Manchester United vs Chelsea

[PS18]

Perhaps I missed it but I really did not see chelsea create very much yet they got 3 goals. But you obviously believe you always get what you deserve in life.

But that's my point - they created maybe four chances and got three goals from chances that were really made for them by poor defending rather than fashioned by great play from themselves (all three were great finishes mind). Half of the job of defending is making sure you're you concentrate when your team is in the ascendancy, because otherwise it's irrelevant how dominant you are at the other end.

It's not a case of believing you get what you deserve in life, it's a case of believing that in football you deserve to lose when you make bad mistakes at crucial times in crucial areas at both ends of the pitch, and we did that.

 

[Virtuoso]

So very disappointing, I agree that our defending was poor (especially Oliver Gill) but we did not deserve to lose that match. Chelsea's defending was made to look even worse than ours because we were all over them and had enough chances to score 4-5 and in the first half our should have got at least 2 or 3. Ultimately, we only have ourselves to blame because this was by no means a great Chelsea side who out-played us...we out-played them but did not take enough of our chances while they were clinical with the few they had.

I have to say though, it does frustrate me that so much importance is placed on the FA Youth Cup by the hierarchy at United. I understand the historical importance and tradition that is all a part of it and I love it when our side is doing well in the Cup etc but it is essentially a one-off knockout cup competition where on the day absolutely anything can happen. I would like it if everyone took the Academy League North more seriously, because consistently good performances will pay off in terms of your league position. We have a very talented side and regardless of the result tonight, I think a lot of them performed well but will also have learnt some harsh lessons from how it panned out. I'm frustrated with tonight, but looking forward to seeing some of these talented youngsters ply their trade week in, week out where consistency in performance should bring its own rewards ultimately.

 

[PS18]

The thing is the Academy League is vital for trying different things - different formations, players in different positions, getting everyone enough games to help their development. In that context you're always going to drop points but it's worth it because player development is pushed forward.

I like having the Youth Cup prioritised to be honest - everyone plays their best side in that, as all the coaches have said it's the nearest these kids will get to playing in first-team style conditions, with the big stadiums, good crowds, cup football with all the pressures that brings. Obviously it's great to see the lads doing well in the Academy League (and they are currently, second if they win their game in hand) but it can't be all about results every week at that level.

 

[Virtuoso]

I see what you mean, but it shouldn't also be just about getting a "result" in the FA Youth Cup either. Using tonight as an example, I'd honestly say that we had better individual performances on the whole than Chelsea as well as a better team performance all round - we played with far more fluency and looked more dangerous. But ultimately, because it's a one-off, anything can happen on the night and (as many would agree) we did not get what we deserved in terms of a result. So to truly judge a set of individuals would be the league, in previous years a side has come along (Sheff Wed, Carlisle etc) and undone us with effective tactics but our players have come across as holding far more talent and potential than the result would suggest. What I'm saying is that the league offers a better view of how strong a youth side set up is on the whole.

 

[PS18]

I think to be honest it should be all about getting a result in the FAYC - it's not just us who prioritise it, I think if you ask any top club they'd rather win the FAYC than the Academy League. It's a chance for the coaches to see how the players cope in a different environment, under different pressures. Obviously it's a one-off, anything can happen and so on but that's part of seeing what the players are made of - like you say, there were lots of positives tonight but similarly, some players faltered.

I don't believe you can judge individuals in a youth setup or the setup as a whole on either the FAYC or the Academy League in isolation so I don't think that's an issue. I also definitely don't think the league offers a better view of how strong sides are simplly because there are so many variables involved - rotation, experimentation, different quality of opposition and so on.

 

[Virtuoso]

I also definitely don't think the league offers a better view of how strong sides are simplly because there are so many variables involved - rotation, experimentation, different quality of opposition and so on.

For those reasons you've mentioned and more, I would say the exact opposite that the league does offer a much better view (on the whole) of how strong a youth side is, us being knocked out by sides like Sheff Wed and Carlisle in the early rounds of the FAYC would otherwise suggest that we had/have a pretty woeful youth set up when that clearly is not the case when you look at these players week in, week out. But I guess it's a difference of opinion then though I agree, for all that it stands for - the FAYC is better to win but what I'm saying is that the league is more often than not a more apt form of deciphering the quality, strength etc of a youth set up because it is made up of so many more matches played of many months, involves more youngsters. a greater variety of oppostion etc.

 

[PS18]

For those reasons you've mentioned and more, I would say the exact opposite that the league does offer a much better view (on the whole) of how strong a youth side is, us being knocked out by sides like Sheff Wed and Carlisle in the early rounds of the FAYC would otherwise suggest that we had/have a pretty woeful youth set up when that clearly is not the case when you look at these players week in, week out. But I guess it's a difference of opinion then though I agree, for all that it stands for - the FAYC is better to win but what I'm saying is that the league is more often than not a more apt form of deciphering the quality, strength etc of a youth set up because it is made up of so many more matches played of many months, involves more youngsters. a greater variety of oppostion etc.

I don't think anyone would automatically think we have a woeful youth setup because we got knocked out by Carlisle, apart from the hopelessly uninformed, whose views I'm sure you'd agree are largely irrelevant. Cup shocks happen at any level.

I guess it is a different opinion. I don't think either competition is an accurate barometer of how strong a youth setup a club has, it's all about the players. If you have terrific players all across the park but no-one capable of sticking the ball in the net, or great attacking talent but a lack of quality at the back, you're not going to succeed in either competition ultimately but that certainly doesn't mean the setup is lacking, or indeed any worse than those who do win those competitions.

Ultimately I agree with the approach of using the league as a means to an end - player developement - and having the youth cup as a real test for the strongest available side, but obviously taking into consideration that shocks happen. I think it's the right balance personally, I don't think we'd be better off (indeed, I think we'd be worse off) if we concentrated our efforts on trying to win the academy league (which I'm sure we are doing, just not at all costs).

 

[Denis' cuff]

But that's my point - they created maybe four chances and got three goals from chances that were really made for them by poor defending rather than fashioned by great play from themselves (all three were great finishes mind). Half of the job of defending is making sure you're you concentrate when your team is in the ascendancy, because otherwise it's irrelevant how dominant you are at the other end.

It's not a case of believing you get what you deserve in life, it's a case of believing that in football you deserve to lose when you make bad mistakes at crucial times in crucial areas at both ends of the pitch, and we did that.

don't read the report in the Guardian then mate. (Guardian is probably the most ABU paper, which is ironic considering it's origins) I didn't see the match but it concluded that because Chelsea won and United lost, they are brilliant and we have a lot of work to do.....and I'm guessing here, so could be wrong, but the only players of theirs that I saw mentioned, were imports whereas United's, apart from one or two, were homegrown. Then again, I'm biased...but then again, I'm pretty clued up on the Guardian. 90% bilge. So ignore all that crap.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

don't read the report in the Guardian then mate. (Guardian is probably the most ABU paper, which is ironic considering it's origins) I didn't see the match but it concluded that because Chelsea won and United lost, they are brilliant and we have a lot of work to do.....and I'm guessing here, so could be wrong, but the only players of theirs that I saw mentioned, were imports whereas United's, apart from one or two, were homegrown. Then again, I'm biased...but then again, I'm pretty clued up on the Guardian. 90% bilge. So ignore all that crap.

I once heard it was particularly ABU because of it's origins (i.e. city of Manchester)

 

[Denis' cuff]

I once heard it was particularly ABU because of it's origins (i.e. city of Manchester)

you may have a point, as most of us think that just like the Guardian, the MEN is run by Berties or the kind of people who support endangered minorities. Not whales and stuff like that but twats like teachers etc not that they're at all endangered but I know what I mean anyway. I think.

 

[Elliott]

I was looking at the average age of the two first XIs. The only player whose DoB I couldn't find was Ra'vel. He used to have a profile on thefa.com but it's gone now. PS18 and myself both seem to recall his DoB being in March 93 sometime, so I've put him down for 1/3-93.

We had the slightly younger team on the night. 17,32 to 17,37 on average. A full 20 days in other words

We also had a much bigger age span. Our first XI included two 15 year olds, a 16 year old, four 17 year olds and four 18 year olds (had the match been played 2 days earlier the numbers would've been six 17 year olds and two 18 year olds). Chelsea fielded two 16 year olds and nine 17 year olds.

 

[MPTutd]

Here are the highlights.

http://www.thefa.com/TheFACup/TheFAYouthCup/NewsAndFeatures/Postings/FAYC3R_ManUChelseareport.htm

 

[Mr. MUJAC]

Very disappointing but it's all part of the learning process.

We can pick holes with individual performances and team selection but at the end of the day it was a talented team who could have won the game easily.

That's what Cup football is all about and gives our lads a wonderful appreciation of what it takes to be a professional footballer.

The FAYC will always have a higher value than the Academy League....it always has done and it is an important step up for many players.

It is in these games that players excel....or not as the case may be!

Clearly our defence has weaknesses and after our recent crop of good defenders (Evans, Pique, Cathcart, Chester) we are struggling a little in that department.

It goes in cycles.....next year we will have Brown still available, Zeki Fryers, and Tom Thorpe will come through. He is playing well in the 16's and already in the England Schools team. Ajose, Petrucci, Brady will all still be available so let's see how things develop.