Bailly, Rashford, Embolo, Sane, Sanches, Dembele. These are the players that have been described as raw by the "Caf scouts" so far this window.
Maybe it's just a coincidence?
What do you understand by the term 'raw'?
- Thread starter Irrational.
- Start date
-
Nik (@Rood) and Imran (@Annihilate Now!) discuss United's fantastic win away against Athletic Club in the semi-final of the Europa League.
They also pick out the positives of United's 4-3 loss away at Brentford, and Nik reviews a day out at Old Trafford watching Manchester United Women qualify for the Champions League.
Maybe it's just a coincidence?
It's not a lazy or nonsensical term when used in the right context, though - what's lazy is calling it lazy right off the bat. Only 'raw' in the terms of a footballer means exactly what it commonly does - crude, not seasoned, and so forth. Someone who is untrained (like a wild horse) and (often) relatively inexperienced, and isn't always consistent with his fundamentals and decision-making. Not to be conflated with sheer talent, because you could very well have a raw player with insignificant amount of talent - which means that you should probably stay off him, in that he'll likely never develop into a top player (eg. Bebé - who had poor fundamentals, was inexperienced and untrained, and didn't really have that much talent to begin with, IMO - though some might disagree). What interests people is that element of 'rawness' combined with a lot of natural talent (particularly athletic - in terms of a natural ability to glide by players, or 'knowing where the goal is', or 'seeing' passes that no-one else does - things that can't always be trained) - hence 'raw talent', which can justify the painstaking process of molding said player over time, with the hope that you can develop him into a great player (like polishing a diamond - a commonly used term).
Essentially, a 'raw talent' evidences flashes of brilliance from time to time because of his natural gifts, but needs to mature (mentally, or physically, or in terms of experience), and be coached up by the manager - making those flashes more consistent and prominent - in terms of improving technique and concentration and conditioning; and trying to have a greater impact on the match instead of a glimpse here and there. And also, sometimes - greater appreciation for team-work - details like that. The raw ingredients are there, but you need the recipe and a flame and a good cook (coach) to prepare the meal.
The perfect example for that would be Hazard at age 16, 17 - when he was starting to emerge. Everyone saw the gifts he had (earning qualitative comparisons to Van Himst and Scifo) - but he was 'raw' in terms of his decision-making and consistency and overall awareness of the game. As he was trained at Lille, he became a sharper decision-maker, more consistent and productive, and had better appreciation for not running into blind alleys, and being mindful of the positioning of his team-mates. Or, someone like Aubameyang - who had it all in terms of physical tools as a forward - but like Hazard, those tools weren't harnessed properly, and he was a 'wild' player - who disappointed despite his rare and explosive talent. A lot of credit for his development goes to Saint Étienne - who channeled his talent in the right direction, after the move to Milan and numerous loans which did next to nothing to develop him. And now he's one of the best attackers around. Or even Cristiano, who was fairly raw at the time he joined United, which is what frustrated a lot of people, in that he would be world class in one game and you saw that 'raw' abiility, and downright awful in the next.
Erm, also: @Raees and @Stack have a background of actual coaching. So they will be able to provide a better/ more technical answer.
I would have thought a player is "raw" when their concentration and decision making hasn't developed yet. So the talent and technique is largely there but they haven't learned how to apply it in the most effective, consistent way. This would then lead to things like rash challenges, concentration lapses, poor positional play and inconsistent performances.
Inexperienced, but has all the tools needed to excel in their position given time, ie Pace, strength potential, good height etc things like being tactically naive to be expected.
Used as a prefix for any player, who isn't the finished article but with time to grow into one - basically pretty much every player under 25.
Stones, Januzaj, Barkley just to name 3 off the top of my head have all been called raw several times. It's just a coincidence that a lot of the best world players that are emerging are black, and a lot of young talent is always said to be raw. Very rarely are players U20 not described as raw, unless they're something else.
Bottom line is like world class people have different ways of using the term raw.
It can be used to criticise a player and it can be used to praise someone I.e. a raw diamond.
A raw diamond would be someone who has a natural feel for the game, plays by instinct and has most technical fundamentals in place but just needs to tweak decision making, improve athleticism but basically has the raw materials in place to make it as a top player.
Someone with zero football brain or very clumsy for me is not a raw talent.. I'd say someone like Ravel Morrison was a raw talent, he had the goods to make it as a top player I.e. alot of things were in place at a young age but due to his attitude and application.. wasn't able to take his game to the next level.
There was a really good piece on Kolo Toure somewhere which gives a really good insight into spotting a raw talent but having the faith that it would turn into something special.
Raw = shit players you like and refuse to admit that they're... Just shit players.
Jones, fabio, memphis, zaha, powell
Jones, fabio, memphis, zaha, powell
It's a man who can run faster, longer and further than others.
Then, you hope he has a footballing brain that goes along with it or that will develop eventually.
Then, you hope he has a footballing brain that goes along with it or that will develop eventually.
Chafed, almost bleeding, pain from going in without having warmed her up first.
Raw to me = A player that has potential to become established but is yet to fulfill it due to lack of experience. Unless they're just crap.
Nothing more
Nothing more
Raw talent for me is a player with some technical ability but hasnt yet fully developed his skill set. I think its partly to do with the difference between technique and skill. technique being the first touch and quality of it. Skill being choosing the right technique at the right time and being able to execute it successfully. So a raw talent might be a player who is good with the ball but isnt always doing the right things at the appropriate time. ie: choosing to dribble at defenders when a pass to a team mate would be better because they are in a great position for a shot.
Actually I think it is a term thats open to a bit of interpretation.
Actually I think it is a term thats open to a bit of interpretation.
Raw = A young player who thinks a lot of himself, hogs the ball a bit too much, tries to do too much, overruns the ball, over/under-hits passes, generally looks uncoordinated and as if they have a lack of balance.
Someone like Verratti (I imagine) wouldn't have been labelled 'raw', because I can imagine that he had very few (if any?) of those traits.
For a number of so called 'raw' youngsters, 'raw' should just be replaced with 'enthusiastic and energetic but not actually very good'
When I think of a so-called 'raw' youngster, I think of a winger who (at 18 or 19) is quick and quick-footed enough to make up for their piss poor close control and first touch. Someone who seems to always under/overrun the ball, but still (7 times out of 10) comes out the other side with the ball due to richochets and just generally being more agile than the 30 year old fullback they're against.
e.g. Zaha.
They don't have much technique, and all they have going for them is quick feet, acceleration, and high opinion of themselves - which results in a tendency to ball-hog.
Would be harsh to call someone like Dembele 'raw', as from what I've seen, he's has polished technique.
Someone like Verratti (I imagine) wouldn't have been labelled 'raw', because I can imagine that he had very few (if any?) of those traits.
For a number of so called 'raw' youngsters, 'raw' should just be replaced with 'enthusiastic and energetic but not actually very good'
When I think of a so-called 'raw' youngster, I think of a winger who (at 18 or 19) is quick and quick-footed enough to make up for their piss poor close control and first touch. Someone who seems to always under/overrun the ball, but still (7 times out of 10) comes out the other side with the ball due to richochets and just generally being more agile than the 30 year old fullback they're against.
e.g. Zaha.
They don't have much technique, and all they have going for them is quick feet, acceleration, and high opinion of themselves - which results in a tendency to ball-hog.
Would be harsh to call someone like Dembele 'raw', as from what I've seen, he's has polished technique.
Last edited:
Quaresma has been raw his entire career.
A teenage player who you fully expect to be world class
It's a player who has all the tools but doesn't use them as well as he could. Basically a player that lacks the experience and has the quality to learn from it. Rooney used to get stupid red cards often. That's a sign of a raw player. Making a wrong decision like crossing the ball instead of keeping possession when you're up with little to go.
Pretty much defines immaturity (raw).
"I learnt a lot from Sir Alex [Ferguson]," said Ronaldo, speaking to The Times Magazine. "One of the terms that I still remember today is 'decision-making'. 'You are great, but you don't have decision-making. Pass the f*****g ball.' He always told me that. 'Cristiano: pass the f*****g ball.' I still have contact with him. He is a great guy, great coach, great human being."
"Manchester was a huge education for me. There were guys who always arrived for training one hour early. [Paul] Scholes and Gary Neville were incredible examples. Neville was the most professional player I saw. This is why these guys played in the top level for ten years.
"People like Giggsy [Ryan Giggs] too. I learnt from them. I would go to training early, too. I would do exercise, strength, abdominals, core: many things. That example from the older players, I took it."
"I learnt a lot from Sir Alex [Ferguson]," said Ronaldo, speaking to The Times Magazine. "One of the terms that I still remember today is 'decision-making'. 'You are great, but you don't have decision-making. Pass the f*****g ball.' He always told me that. 'Cristiano: pass the f*****g ball.' I still have contact with him. He is a great guy, great coach, great human being."
"Manchester was a huge education for me. There were guys who always arrived for training one hour early. [Paul] Scholes and Gary Neville were incredible examples. Neville was the most professional player I saw. This is why these guys played in the top level for ten years.
"People like Giggsy [Ryan Giggs] too. I learnt from them. I would go to training early, too. I would do exercise, strength, abdominals, core: many things. That example from the older players, I took it."
In football it has no set meaning because its been used to describe everything from potentially brilliant young players to players with poor technique.
it means going in bare taw.
as in: "I telt her it wis bare taw or nae taw at aw"
as in: "I telt her it wis bare taw or nae taw at aw"
Came here to post this.
A very talented young player who has the potential/predispositions to become a great player.
An interesting analogy would be the cases of Benzema & Ben Arfa:
- Younger, they played together with France & Lyon
- They were expected to take the lead of the France team
- Ben Arfa made the mistake to join Marseille early and his mental qualities were not proper while Benzema stayed longer to join Madrid
- At the end, you can see the difference in terms of career between them
To put things into perspective, let's look at the France U17 that won the Euro in 2004:
Almost all these players were born in 1987
#11: Ben Arfa
#10: Nasri
#9: Ménez
#14: Songo - he rapidly joined La Masia (Barcelona) and used to play with Messi/Fabregas/Pique. - then EPL then La Liga and now the MLS
#5: Thicot - captain - 2nd Portuguese division
#4: El Mourabet - injuries, 4th French division
Then, you have players like Akakpo (Roumanian league) and other players (Yahyaoui) who hadn't the chance to be a professional player.
Who plays the Euro 2016? Only the goalkeeper Costil & Benzema (on the bench in the final but scored some goals in this competition)
This team has won the final against Spain (Pique, Fabregas, Diego Capel...).
Diverse factors lead a raw to success or failure
An interesting analogy would be the cases of Benzema & Ben Arfa:
- Younger, they played together with France & Lyon
- They were expected to take the lead of the France team
- Ben Arfa made the mistake to join Marseille early and his mental qualities were not proper while Benzema stayed longer to join Madrid
- At the end, you can see the difference in terms of career between them
To put things into perspective, let's look at the France U17 that won the Euro in 2004:
Almost all these players were born in 1987
#11: Ben Arfa
#10: Nasri
#9: Ménez
#14: Songo - he rapidly joined La Masia (Barcelona) and used to play with Messi/Fabregas/Pique. - then EPL then La Liga and now the MLS
#5: Thicot - captain - 2nd Portuguese division
#4: El Mourabet - injuries, 4th French division
Then, you have players like Akakpo (Roumanian league) and other players (Yahyaoui) who hadn't the chance to be a professional player.
Who plays the Euro 2016? Only the goalkeeper Costil & Benzema (on the bench in the final but scored some goals in this competition)
This team has won the final against Spain (Pique, Fabregas, Diego Capel...).
Diverse factors lead a raw to success or failure
Bags of talent, no experience. Raw.
I'd have to disagree. The players who tend to be labelled 'raw' are those who have iffy ball control.
The kind who overruns the ball, over-hits passes, miscontrols passes, which requires them to use their athleticism to compensate.
Martial, for example, is pretty polished. Thus he's rarely labelled 'raw'.
A player with bags of talent may be raw (Rooney), but not every raw player has bags of talent (Powell, Zaha...)
This, it's just another way to say I don't know how it will be with the said player, so he must be raw.
Not yet hooked up with a stunning WAG.
Best format to shoot photos in.
It's a word given to a footballer by fans who is otherwise just shit but then linked with their club.
To me the term means not ready, wet behind the ears, or fresh out of the bag.
Raw is in relation to experience. A player might be good enough at U18 but his inexperience will be quite visible if thrown into 1st Team as he will make basic technical errors coupled with some excellent moments. Applies mostly to young players around 23 and below. Williams and Axel are very good CBs but still too raw to play 1st team football every week
Very much this.
