I started a thread on this. From the perspective of providing more playing options for players.

At this point in time, I think there are too many players sitting on HAL benches who are good enough for HAL first eleven football. There are also more youth players coming on who can play viable  roles in teams with  the majority of their team-mates needing to be experienced HAL regulars or overseas pros who could make up viable teams.

I'm not sure NPL football is a viable option. It is currently a very physical game and less technical in the better NPL clubs. They feature low grade ball circulation but often have very good defensive organisation. 

Often it is not a question of a player just playing backwards and sideways, but the ability of their team-mates to create space by opening viable passing lanes for them to play forwards.

This is a difference between the Dutch KNVB ( where this was really  emphasised) and  our current FFA NC coach education  (where I've never heard it).

It is also a case of the team in the final able to play through a full press as opposed to a half press. There was more  space available for Australia to exploit in the Thai formation's full press. They also played a higher line  their full press, leaving more space to exploit in behind at times.

One has to credit the Thais for this feature of their play. Many of our defensive  players had trouble dispossessing them.

One has to credit Thailand in that they tried to play through midfield. Most of their long high balls, were prudent diagonal switches of play passes to more advanced players out on the the wings.

Late in the game there was a shorter Aussie,  possibly playing as an attacking mid, who displayed  outstanding close ball control in ball carrying, dribbling and round ing defenders. Was it number 6 or number 8? Or am I confusing this player with the under 16s?

I couldn't identify him because in the second half because most of these actions occurred in the left sided attacking third, farthest away from my screen with  dodgy stream footage.

No doubt.

Many of our players also  demonstrated excellent first touch on both sides of the body, particularly under pressure of limited time and space. Sometimes it didn't work on a bumpy .  of   the rapid fire, one and two touch playing out in tight spaces was exemplary - which is one of the man reasons provided by FFA for developing a FFA NC.

FIFA Technical Departments have repeatedly identified this trait as being prevalent in 8 world football powerhouses.

They also identified that in this area we were lacking before 2011 after analysing our 2010 World Cup performance in South Africa, and previously in Germany.

 Scoring most goals from proactive (effective team play rather than capitalising on mistakes) open play was a feature. Too often we have been reliant on set pieces.

It also helped that the improved quality of running with the ball, was possible to demonstrate because the Thais played a higher defensive  line further out from goals.

Kuzmanowski (?), Blackwood, Champas(?) all displayed good control, ball carrying at high speed and being able to maintain possession under close defensive pressure.

I think coaching could explain a lot of it

The individuals involved at u16 level look very impressive to me

It's difficult to say, definitively, who is/are better. Especially since we're talking about youth football, some develop later. Some may have lots of talent which they are capable of utilising at training, but struggle with in match situations.

But, in all likelihood, yes. Derrick was, far and away, Australia's most dangerous player at the U17 World Cup. He was probably the only Aussie who would have been a good chance at being good enough to play for the German team who beat Australia. He has lovely close control and one-on-one ability, which he can maintain while sprinting at and past opponents and picking gaps. No senior Australian footballer has this ability. Rogic has the skill but not quite the speed. Kruse and Leckie have the pace but lack the close control. So Derrick, yes. Arzani is similar, bit slighter though (?). Very nimble. He wasn't played enough in the U17 World Cup, but he was made an impact in his cameos with his agility and close control... basically unAustralian. It's a joy to behold. Those attributes give those two fellas a huge head start. If any of Kuzmonoski, Champness, Rose, Shabow and Maia have those attributes (which they may, just not as far as I'm aware), then that's super encouraging.

Armenakas, Piscopo and Brimner are playing at a higher level than all the others. Armenakas, although hit and miss in the U17 World Cup, takes risks and is technically good. Again, this is something which is encouraging and something which the current system has stifled a bit. We need fellas like that who think outside the box and try something different. He's a level above in terms of unlocking opposition defences from CAM. Caletti was also very strong in the U17 World CUp.

anyone found a link to where to find the AFC Under 20 championship squad I can't see it anywhere on the Football Federation Australia website at all pathetic & useless bastards.

There's a good chance it hasn't been officially named yet, but the players may have been notified 

Great way to address criticism of a lack of transparency lol.

Fair enough if they tell specific players they haven't made the side before any official announcement. That might be regarded as more tactful. But not great to have a policy of non-disclosure while some know but others don't. And it has to be all the more upsetting for those lads who don't make the side and who hear about it by way of second-hand gossip. Way too cliquey.

They should just break it gently to those who don't make the squad, then inform those who have made the squad and, finally, publicly disclose the information shortly afterwards.

What a load of nonsense, as if the players would rather find out via a press statement on the other side of the world 

Reading comprehension game is strong, huh?

Step 1) Break the news gently (via phone call) to those who haven't made it who were in the mix
Step 2) Ring up those who have made it and tell them
Step 3) Publicly disclose it shortly afterwards

When do we find out the u19 list for the AFC championship?

they officially go into camp for the tournament from Monday October 3rd ahead of their first group match of the AFC under 19 championship on Saturday October 15th at 7.30pm local time, Sunday October 16th 3.30am EDT.

Don't believe for one moment that Panos, Reno, or Jake are playing at a better level than Rose , Blackwood . And I am aware Gombau and the medical team of thr FFA are in touch with Adelaide to ensure Mells is healthy.

Good shout about Mells. He's very promising.

I think it's difficult to argue that Armenakas isn't playing (at the very least training) at a standard that is several rungs up. He just made the bench of the Serie A. That's phenomenal.

Leaving aside the level he's playing at, he's rather creative. Why do you think people start to froth when Rogic and Mooy come on the scene? Because they bring creativity that you don't get with most Aussie footballers. We get the McKay and Leckie types. And they're very useful, we need them. But the creativity that Rogic, Mooy, Armenakas types bring is rare (rare in all countries, not just Australia). One criticism of the way they're playing at the minute is they can be a predictable. Armenakas is technically good and is very unpredictable. This is invaluable to Australian football. We need footballers who have that je ne sais quoi. 

Also this isn't purely saying Australian-based footballers aren't good enough or that the level that they're playing at is definitive (it's indicative but definitive). I mention Blackwood, Aranzani and Derrick. The latter was the most dangerous Australian footballer at the U17WC, imo, and one of the few who had technical skill and great acceleration. He suggested he can do more on his own than Armenakas, who plays at a higher level. Then Armenakas suggested the highest levels of creativity which will be terrific for Aus in link-up play.

I read on here somewhere that the PS4 player pathway trials with Sydney FC atm, are comparing Socceroo stats against the trialist's to give them a benchmark for gauging performance. this can be useful for determining physical elements and passing stats etc but does nothing to measure vision and game cleverness/flair/creativity. I look at a player like Leckie and see a powerful running winger, but a player who lacks a deft touch and genuine 'two footedness'. is this the Ozzie system failing..

Q. Should young players seek Euro academy and club opportunities, like Amenakas, or plough on through PS4 and Ozzie pathways (COE and A league etc). Bearing in mind recent very bad U16 results against decent Asia condfed teams and poor historical U19's etc. 

Horses for courses for me - if a player and subsequently his family are able to join a Euro Academy and learn and develop through them then it should be encouraged. On the flip side, if a player doesn't wish to or can't leave Australia (thinking non-EU heritage) then we need to make sure we provide enough opportunities for them to learn and develop here. This is hopefully where the A-League academies that are being planned and built will come in to play.

The beauty of our game is that is a truly global experience - we should never seek to put the shackles on a players movement and thirst for a 'football education' to fit some pre-defined mantra or curriculum. What one player learns in Australia will be vastly different to what a player learns in Italy, vastly different to what a player learns in the UK, vastly different to what they learn in Central Europe and so on. This shouldn't be seen as a negative - we should embrace this diversity of learning! By learning in different footballing cultures they will all bring something different to the table at a senior national level. This is what will enable us to become consistently good at a top level. There are numerous examples of nations that put an emphasis on 'staying at home' to ply their trade and learn the game and fail regularly on the international stage - perhaps the most stunning example of this is England. Plenty of talented players over the years, but they all play the same way because they were all taught the same way - makes them incredibly one-dimensional at senior level. There will be other examples but that is the most high profile one I can think of.

The Socceroos have always been a clash of competing styles and ideologies among the playing group - it's what happens with a largely migrant population. All it takes is a special type of manager to understand this and use it to our advantage - Hiddink did it, Ange is currently doing it.

In short, we should be encouraging our youth to simply play - it doesn't matter whether it's in Australia or overseas, we just need them playing.

lately it seems going through a league pathways is a better development pathway than euro academies and coe imo
we haven't had a lot of players come through euro academies and set oz football on fire in the last few years. Not sure why

But A league appears to be improving as a development pathway every year.

Agree with both opinions above but I really think that youth players really need to get the best advice when making a decision as to where they go to develop their skills. The right coach/coaches club to develop that players particular skills required. Some coaches will get the best out of players tactically and others technically. They should all have the physical side covered.

Couldn't agree more - however, it does depend on the child. You yourself, as a parent of an underage national representative, will have seen that some boys respond better to different coaching, or that one boy needs more help in a specific trait whilst other boys don't.

I guess I just get annoyed by people (not aimed directly at anyone in particular, just being very general) who advocate a 'one size fits all' model.

One of the points raised by a number of posters above is comparing European academies, in general, to Australian scenarios.

If one trains in most German,  French, Spanish, Portuguese, Belgian and Dutch academies they are far more likely to be better than most other European countries, apart from the notable exceptions in some countries, like Croatia's Dynamo Zagreb.

European football milieus are not homogeneous.

Our coaching system is better than most countries, because the Aussie system is  based on the European powerhouses.

I know a young lad 18 YO who was at one of the Sydney based A league academies. The first team coach told the academy players that most of them would get their first contract overseas, not in OZ. So as a pathway to A league, the academies are limited. The player actually ended up going O/S (not sure where) cause he felt that his chances of actually being a player with a pro contract were greater. The A league tends to be for older, already developed pro's. No room for young players. The NPL, as a part time semi pro environment, is inadequate. The player felt that if he was moast likely going to have to go O/S then why wait. Learn the O/s System and style and language sooner rather than later. IMO, although the A league academies may be OK, they do not offer much in the way of pro outcomes for young 18 - 22 players. If we had a 2nd tier pro environment this could be different. ATM players will need to go as soon as they are able. I think someone already noted the disparity in the number of young socceroos who actually have regular A league time, and it is not many. Maybe that is part of the problem. 

100% it depends on the child hence "the right advice" meaning along with the parents someone that understands the personal and footballing needs of that child. We made this decision when considering the COE v Melbourne city. There may be a time where that its City v overseas? Either way there seems to be to many of our young talent making the wrong decisions.

the interesting question a lot of people have been asking for years is when is the best time to go overseas if you play in the a league?

My current view is after about 100 a league games if you are a standout in the league

You only need to watch the EUFA u19 champions youth football to compare.

Why would the Wanderers be telling youngsters to move overseas?

IMO there needs to be a greater assertion of youth players in match day squads in the HAL. A minimum of players in the matchday squad that are Australian and under a certain age, say 20. Too many average players in the 25-32 bracket taking up squaddie positions that should be covered by younsters. 

With acadmies now in place for most clubs it would also provide a nice pathway and guarantee of opportunities. They're more likely to get a run if they're named on an extended bench than if they're not named at all!

Conservative coaches do also need a kick up the backside as the quality of our youngsters is much better than what it was a few years ago and the skillsets of many of our young players already far outweigh their senior counterparts. Playing in the NPLs will also help them with the physical component further readying them for HAL football. 

Money I'd presume.Could make a bit of dosh if the right clause was added.

Great question. I basically agree with walnuts on this.

I think the Australian system needs to have the structure in place for us to be producing world class youth footballers who become world class senior footballers. By the way, great story from the Aussie lad at the Sydney academy. That's part of the problem and needs to be addressed (among other problems). They need to be strongly encouraged to promote youth. But even if that is addressed, unless the quality of the A-League jumps up substantially, for some of the lads their talent is put to best use by going to the right European club as young as possible.

The reality is that most of these lads have most of their immediate family and friends living in Australia. They study here and so on. And, while many have a good chance of becoming professional footballers, only a handful present the traits which would suggest they can end up world class. So it's fair enough for most to stay in Australia (and the system needs to cater for them better). But la crème de la crème are best of going to Europe as young as possible. That comes with the caveat that they need to have the will to make even bigger sacrifices if they wish to be playing at the top tier of world football. Also that development is uneven. There are outliers. Some lads who might not seem to that great will suddenly find talent later.

But yep horses for causes.

Here our opinions on this differ.

For most, yep that's fine. But for the best of the best?

I'm talking about Derrick, Arzani and Pasquali. Three of Australia's most gifted youth footballers who are all still in Australia. There may be others in Australia of a similar age who are as good or better than them who should also be included.

Anyway, those lads are probably about as good as any in the world from any country that age. The problem is this If they play about a hundred A-League games, they'll probably be in their early twenties by the time they get to Europe.

Meanwhile, there is some lad in Belgium who we'll say is as good as them (neither innately better nor worse, for argument's sake). From younger than this age, he has had far superior coaches and been playing with and against far superior footballers. From about 17 or 18, he has been playing in the Belgian Pro League. By the time he is about twenty, he has already done so well in that league that clubs like Manchester United, PSG, Dortmund and Barcelona want to sign him and want him to start for them.

Being mindful of the notion that those years are so crucial to development, the Belgium lad has been in the best possible set-up. While the Aussie lads have come up against defenders who are deplorably bad and midfielders and strikers who need to take that extra three touches. So by the time they're about twenty, the Aussie lad (after maybe a hundred games) might be ready to make a transfer to the Belgian league. But all the best Belgians (including that other lad) have already finished their development by then and moved to even better leagues. The Belgian league being great for development but perhaps not quite as good as some others in terms of the finished product. The Aussie lads then will have to play in the Belgian league for years. Then, by the time they're in their mid 20s, midtable clubs in the Premier League or Bundesliga or whatever may consider them. And if they do go there, that's handy for the NT (just a case of them not achieving their potential). But even still, those clubs will probably be a bit sceptical because there are other footballers who've done more in less time whom they'll also be considering signing.

So basically if they play a hundred A-League games, even if they have the talent, it puts them miles behind their European and South American counterparts. It means they're so far behind in terms of trajectory. It means the chance of becoming world class and playing a starring role for a side competing in the knock-out stages of the Champions League is so much smaller.