HMRC Winding up petition/order

[Hound]

I am not sure of the rules but could we use mostly u23s for the Papa Johns Trophy? That for me would be far better to help their development.

What are we basing the not ready statement on? Plenty of them have already made numerous first team appearances.

Weird thing is we announced we signed some 20 year old from a champ club with a couple of league goals and 20 first team appearances most people would say sounds an intelligent signing

They aren’t 17/18 year old kids. They’ve done time in U23 and been around the first team. No better time to try them than now

I don't think it's enough to say that, just because they've appeared, it means they are good enough though either. How many of them have actually impacted games? Jahmari Clarke hit 2 goals against Birmingham over a season ago, nothing else since. Kelvin E scored from a long throw against Preston, very little else. Yet they all get praised for good work ethic and whatever else, but not many have impacted that many games.

The difference with a player like Olise was he was impacting games. Obviously they won't all be as good as him and yes, a drop down division will do them more good than harm, but do we think that several players are at the level where we want to be at? The top end of L1? Some have had loan spells at the bottom end of L1 at best.

I think the only players ready for serious first team involvement (squad wise) are Dorsett, Abrefa and maybe Andresson. No doubt there will be someone who has a breakout season, but I've seen posts listing 7+ academy players that some people think are good enough, just because they could be or because they've made about a dozen first team appearances. It doesn't always work like that.

I’d be genuinely annoyed if we only gave chances to those 3 in the first team squad

I thought Ehibhatiomhan did well in his games considering our style and lack of possession. Good goal in the cup game as well when he looked out best player

John Clarke looked handy when he played. Craig on tbe appearances he had. Senga was very highly rated by Ince and I think will break through. Camara has had some good games for us.

So add to your 3 and that’s 8 who should be in and around. Of course they won’t all make it/ be good enough but any signing is also a gamble (and our record is hardly great)

For me 20/21 is the time to be breaking through, esp at L1. If we don’t give them a chance now they’ll just leave for someone who will at the end of the year (and we repeat the mistakes of Cooper, Stacey, Dickie, Fosu etc)

[leon]

To be fair to the BBC, as soon as we've been promoted in the past they've referred to us as Premiership newboys or similar so it works both ways.

To be fair to the BBC …

Results, scores, league tables and other sports info is really easy to find and navigate through on line ….

And … I like BBC Berks commentary …. and…. no

That’s it …

I have frequently got the impression that they don’t like our club whereas they appear to love anything in or from Manchester - or in or from other poverty stricken northern cities…

Almost everything else is politicised whiny dross.

Welcome back Schards

I know it's a bitter old loon but it's not that bitter old loon is it?

[Snowflake Royal]

To be fair to the BBC …

Results, scores, league tables and other sports info is really easy to find and navigate through on line ….

And … I like BBC Berks commentary …. and…. no

That’s it …

I have frequently got the impression that they don’t like our club whereas they appear to love anything in or from Manchester - or in or from other poverty stricken northern cities…

Almost everything else is politicised whiny dross.

Welcome back Schards

I know it's a bitter old loon but it's not that bitter old loon is it?

Nah, if there's one thing you could say about schards (other than his political views) it's that he wasn’t shy about who he was.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

What are we basing the not ready statement on? Plenty of them have already made numerous first team appearances.

Weird thing is we announced we signed some 20 year old from a champ club with a couple of league goals and 20 first team appearances most people would say sounds an intelligent signing

They aren’t 17/18 year old kids. They’ve done time in U23 and been around the first team. No better time to try them than now

I don't think it's enough to say that, just because they've appeared, it means they are good enough though either. How many of them have actually impacted games? Jahmari Clarke hit 2 goals against Birmingham over a season ago, nothing else since. Kelvin E scored from a long throw against Preston, very little else. Yet they all get praised for good work ethic and whatever else, but not many have impacted that many games.

The difference with a player like Olise was he was impacting games. Obviously they won't all be as good as him and yes, a drop down division will do them more good than harm, but do we think that several players are at the level where we want to be at? The top end of L1? Some have had loan spells at the bottom end of L1 at best.

I think the only players ready for serious first team involvement (squad wise) are Dorsett, Abrefa and maybe Andresson. No doubt there will be someone who has a breakout season, but I've seen posts listing 7+ academy players that some people think are good enough, just because they could be or because they've made about a dozen first team appearances. It doesn't always work like that.

I’d be genuinely annoyed if we only gave chances to those 3 in the first team squad

I thought Ehibhatiomhan did well in his games considering our style and lack of possession. Good goal in the cup game as well when he looked out best player

John Clarke looked handy when he played. Craig on tbe appearances he had. Senga was very highly rated by Ince and I think will break through. Camara has had some good games for us.

So add to your 3 and that’s 8 who should be in and around. Of course they won’t all make it/ be good enough but any signing is also a gamble (and our record is hardly great)

For me 20/21 is the time to be breaking through, esp at L1. If we don’t give them a chance now they’ll just leave for someone who will at the end of the year (and we repeat the mistakes of Cooper, Stacey, Dickie, Fosu etc)

Yeah listing those 3 is really working on now, someone will be given a chance, be it Kelvin E, Camara, Senga etc and will probably do well, although I'm not expecting 8 of them will do well. I'd rather give them the best possible opportunity by having them go out on loan to a L2 side, get 40+ games under their belt and reassess next season to see if they are good enough, as opposed to just being part of the 25 and not really getting too much of a look in.

Again, looking handy is one thing, actually standing out and having an impact is where they will get through. Not necessarily disagreeing, but they need to be doing more. I wouldn't mind it so much if players were looking to do the right things e.g. if someone like Camara gave it away 6 times in a gamer but was looking for the killer ball, driving at players. You can work with that. Just being passive and being involved won't get them anywhere.

[Hound]

Guess that’s where a good manager comes in rather than one who’ll drop you after one bad game. Hunt said the right things about plying without fear then dropped Camara totally after one bad half

[tmesis]

Again, looking handy is one thing, actually standing out and having an impact is where they will get through. Not necessarily disagreeing, but they need to be doing more. I wouldn't mind it so much if players were looking to do the right things e.g. if someone like Camara gave it away 6 times in a gamer but was looking for the killer ball, driving at players. You can work with that. Just being passive and being involved won't get them anywhere.

Memories of the cup game at Kidderminster resurface, with a team of young players who looked really tidy passing the ball around, but rarely looked like creating an actual chance.

[PieEater]

I'm expecting a lot of games to be like that Kidderminster game, maybe we have lots of possession but the opposition will grind out a goal or two from their chances. The problem with bringing the kids in is they are not as street smart about the antics you need to win games. Of course I'd love it if skill was deciding factor but in this league it's more likely effort and organisation.

I don't think we have a core team for that yet, we need a midfield upgrade.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Again, looking handy is one thing, actually standing out and having an impact is where they will get through. Not necessarily disagreeing, but they need to be doing more. I wouldn't mind it so much if players were looking to do the right things e.g. if someone like Camara gave it away 6 times in a gamer but was looking for the killer ball, driving at players. You can work with that. Just being passive and being involved won't get them anywhere.

Memories of the cup game at Kidderminster resurface, with a team of young players who looked really tidy passing the ball around, but rarely looked like creating an actual chance.

Yep. I'm sure there has been development in there since that game and I don't doubt most will do ok and we will compete, but competing isn't enough if we want to be near the top this season. I'd rather we looked to loan someone for a season, or bring in 1/2 more experienced heads like Walcott on 1 year deals, allow the youngsters to go out on loan, possibly lower end L1 or L2, wrack up some consistent minutes and then look to bring them in then if they are good enough. I'm just not sure that many will be ready yet and we will get found out a lot if we begin relying on multiple.

[6ft Kerplunk]

allow the youngsters to go out on loan, possibly lower end L1

Er, can we loan players to our self?

[Snowflake Royal]

How handy did Richards look his first two seasons?

Not very.

Came on brilliantly because he got game time and got a move to Bayern.

You can't expect youth players to come in fully formed, or get there without playing games.

Olise had little impact when Gomes first played him at the end of a season.

Loader had no impact, now doing well elsewhere.

[WestYorksRoyal]

It's about balance within the match squad. If we start 6 or 7 academy products at once, we'll lose more games than we win. But give 1 or 2 a start in a team performing well, plus another couple from the bench, and it will help their development and ours. If we have 7 or 8 on the edge, we should be giving them chances to show what they can do. Hopefully a couple grasp the mantle and put in performances that demand regular selection, and the remainder can be backup.

People like to look at the era of Fosu, Dickie, Cooper etc., but in reality there is rarely space to play them all at once. They need to be mixed in with experience, and circumstances may just not align for some of them.

Recruitment will show our intention. You look at Senga and Craig in CM; it is a position where we have no senior specialists. I think we can all agree we need at least 2 players in, but some would say we need 3. And the trust in Senga and Craig is probably a key dividing line. Similarly, we are light up front, but if we sign 2 more first team strikers, how many chances will Ehib and Clarke get?

It partially depends on availability. If 3 good L1 CMs are available and affordable, go for it. But don't fill a squad position with mediocre loanees from another academy.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

You can't expect youth players to come in fully formed, or get there without playing games.

But that's exactly what I'm saying, these players aren't getting game time and aren't impacting when they do play either unless it's against U23 players like the Watford FA Cup game.

Hence get them out on loan, like with Andresson, Dorsett etc and get them minutes and let's see them progress. Then we can look to integrate them into the side.

If Richards was sold the season before Pauno arrived, nobody would have batted an eyelid. Yes, could have argued he'd have been "another that got away" but he wasn't doing much for us previously. It's getting the timings right and making sure we bring them in the correct situations.

A small squad with prospects that have limited first team appearances doesn't suddenly mean let's introduce them all into the squad, otherwise we and they will end up nowhere. It's got to be balanced. Senga and Craig shouldn't just be coming in because there is a position to fill (for example), they need to be coming in alongside other, more senior players and working their way in.

[Hound]

I think the idea of loaning is a bit idealistic. I don’t think L2 clubs would be necessarily lining up to take our younger players and guarantee game time

Easier if we were still a champ club

Then if we loan to non league is that really a high enough standard to tell?

They’ve all done u23 and trained with our first team. That’s ok I think to make a judgement

[YorkshireRoyal99]

I think the idea of loaning is a bit idealistic. I don’t think L2 clubs would be necessarily lining up to take our younger players and guarantee game time

Easier if we were still a champ club

Then if we loan to non league is that really a high enough standard to tell?

They’ve all done u23 and trained with our first team. That’s ok I think to make a judgement

Well if we are under the impression that 7/8 players "could" be integrated into our first team, you'd be imagining that L2 clubs would be jumping at the chance to take them on loan. If not, surely that says more about the players themselves?

We lost our Cat 1 academy status for last season only, we've now got it back this season and had it for about a decade previous. So obviously the club is in a place to be producing and keeping hold of the best talents we can, that should be appealing for a lot of L2 clubs if the players were good enough.

I don't think playing U23 football is anything to write home about. It's nothing compared to senior football, even at National League level. Yes, I probably wouldn't be integrating many/any players into the first team off the back of a NL loan spell unless it was something special, but a lot of the time it's better than being stuck in the U23's. Players staying in the academy too long is the problem for me.

[Hound]

Problem is Prem and to a lesser extent champ clubs have tons of youngsters they are trying to loan out. You’re a L2 club you’ll prob take one of them first

I’m sure we’ve tried to loan players out before and yet very few have happened. Keepers - yes (agree find CBC somewhere). Jahmari and Dorsett. Can’t think of anyone else at all recently

[Sutekh]

Do you get more loan interest from clubs if you have a cat 1 Academy?

[SCIAG]

I don't think playing U23 football is anything to write home about. It's nothing compared to senior football, even at National League level. Yes, I probably wouldn't be integrating many/any players into the first team off the back of a NL loan spell unless it was something special, but a lot of the time it's better than being stuck in the U23's. Players staying in the academy too long is the problem for me.

I don’t think this is an especially informed view.

There are some meaningful differences between senior and youth football, especially when it comes to physicality and competitiveness. But… look, it’s not a secret that at youth games you get to speak to players who aren’t part of the squad, or to players’ families (who make up a large portion of the crowd… perhaps less now that McIntyre isn’t playing, but still).

Omar Richards never went out on loan. He found the step up really easy. Same for Rinomhota and McIntyre.

15 years ago, yes, sure, consensus was that reserve football was a waste of time and players were sent out on loan frequently. These days, not so much. We’ve sent quite a few players on loans that were complete waste of times or were actively detrimental (Aaron Kuhl to Dundee United being the textbook example). Now a minority of players go out on loan. We’ve also had plenty of players who stepped up without that experience - OK, McIntyre and Olise were always considered supreme talents, but Richards and Rinomhota were not, and they just got on with it.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

I don't think playing U23 football is anything to write home about. It's nothing compared to senior football, even at National League level. Yes, I probably wouldn't be integrating many/any players into the first team off the back of a NL loan spell unless it was something special, but a lot of the time it's better than being stuck in the U23's. Players staying in the academy too long is the problem for me.

I don’t think this is an especially informed view.

There are some meaningful differences between senior and youth football, especially when it comes to physicality and competitiveness. But… look, it’s not a secret that at youth games you get to speak to players who aren’t part of the squad, or to players’ families (who make up a large portion of the crowd… perhaps less now that McIntyre isn’t playing, but still).

Omar Richards never went out on loan. He found the step up really easy. Same for Rinomhota and McIntyre.

15 years ago, yes, sure, consensus was that reserve football was a waste of time and players were sent out on loan frequently. These days, not so much. We’ve sent quite a few players on loans that were complete waste of times or were actively detrimental (Aaron Kuhl to Dundee United being the textbook example). Now a minority of players go out on loan. We’ve also had plenty of players who stepped up without that experience - OK, McIntyre and Olise were always considered supreme talents, but Richards and Rinomhota were not, and they just got on with it.

Baring in mind it took Richards 2 seasons to become an established member of the team and was in squads where we were bloated in the LB position. Not to say it wasn't good that he could flourish with us, but we were never really relying on him.

I'm not sure that's true though about players not going out on loan. You look at the most recent England National Team and see how many of those went out on loan, Pickford, Maddison, Kane, White, Ramsdale, Walker etc. Probably about as many as there aren't, and most of the others broke through at a very young age (Foden, Shaw, Bellingham, TAA, Saka) because they were too good for the U23's.

I suppose the argument against would be is that it's a case-by-case basis really, it'll probably never be the same between two players. Although there are very few clubs that bring half a dozen+ on within the same window and succeed. Having said that, it also doesn't mean we can't, I hope we do. I just don't see it.

[Clyde1998]

I don't think playing U23 football is anything to write home about. It's nothing compared to senior football, even at National League level. Yes, I probably wouldn't be integrating many/any players into the first team off the back of a NL loan spell unless it was something special, but a lot of the time it's better than being stuck in the U23's. Players staying in the academy too long is the problem for me.

I don’t think this is an especially informed view.

There are some meaningful differences between senior and youth football, especially when it comes to physicality and competitiveness. But… look, it’s not a secret that at youth games you get to speak to players who aren’t part of the squad, or to players’ families (who make up a large portion of the crowd… perhaps less now that McIntyre isn’t playing, but still).

Omar Richards never went out on loan. He found the step up really easy. Same for Rinomhota and McIntyre.

15 years ago, yes, sure, consensus was that reserve football was a waste of time and players were sent out on loan frequently. These days, not so much. We’ve sent quite a few players on loans that were complete waste of times or were actively detrimental (Aaron Kuhl to Dundee United being the textbook example). Now a minority of players go out on loan. We’ve also had plenty of players who stepped up without that experience - OK, McIntyre and Olise were always considered supreme talents, but Richards and Rinomhota were not, and they just got on with it.

I agree with this. The standard of youth football and coaching has improved to a point where the only real benefit of going out on loan is to develop mental attributes before they appear for the first team - unless specific circumstances would see the player benefit. The style of play and qualities required tends to be quite different between most Cat 1 sides and most League One/Two sides too - so less physical players would probably struggle a lot more in the lower leagues when compared to more physical players, even if they're technically much better.

Another couple that came to mind: Liam Kelly only went on loan to Bath City in the National League South, before playing just shy of 100 matches for us over three seasons in the Championship; Danny Loader never went out on loan and is now a Porto squad player.

I would say, however, if a player is reaching twenty-one and they're not close to the first team, they're unlikely to ever make it without playing first team football somewhere.

[Royal Ginger]

I thought youth football was very skills based and the point of loan football is to get the youngsters used to being bullied by lower league bruisers.