fbpx

Looking For A Good Investment

 

Two hundred and sixty million pounds.

 

The Football Association announced that they are increasing their investment in grassroots football from £200million over four years to £260million over four years. This is in addition to the creation of 30 football hubs across the country which will cost further multiples of millions. In 2014 the FA declared that £230 would be spent on these football hubs creating a greater number of 3G pitches and centres available for coach education. The combined investment amounts to £490million.

 

This is undoubtedly a huge amount of money. While the Premier League is awash with television money grassroots football clubs have to go cap in hand for funding. So how will the FA money be used?

 

Boosting Participation –

Delivering more varied formats of the game to address the drop in 11v11 participation.

 

Developing Better Players –

Each year £4million (£2million from the government) will be invested in developing grassroots coaches.

A network of County Coaches to support grassroots coaches through mentoring programmes.

The extension of coach bursaries to get more women and people from diverse backgrounds into the game.

 

Better Training and Facilities –

The FA is committing £48million to new turf pitches through the Football Foundation.

 

Football Workforce –

Football will become more representative of the communities it serves through inclusion initiatives. The FA is also rolling out technology to run the game more efficiently and create lines of communication with players across all grassroots leagues.
That is how the FA have decided it is best to spend the money. Would a grassroots club agree? What does a grassroots club truly need? Does it need a football workforce in order to survive?
At a basic level grassroots clubs need kit. They need equipment. They need players. They need somewhere to train. They need somewhere to play. Training and pitches swallows a huge amount of a clubs budget each year, help is certainly required in terms of affordability. The money pledged addresses the facilities (provided they are made affordable and available) but not the rest.
At youth grassroots level a basic team kit will cost around £10 a player. A Nike kit will cost £20 plus per player. An Adidas kit will cost a similar amount. No matter how good a team is, they will struggle to play with no kit.
They will struggle even more without any players. Quite obviously if you have no players you have no team. Equally with no players there are no fees. No fees, no money, no kit, no facilities. Might it be suitable for the FA to invest some of the money in player recruitment for grassroots clubs? If boosting participation is one of their goals then a part of their strategy could be an open notice board for all clubs to register that they need players and any one who is looking for a club to place their profile. Match.com, for grassroots. There are some sites doing this but it is splintered and specialised. One website or webpage for everyone to use, all in one place could be seen as a good way to invest a relatively small portion of the £260 million.
Cones are cheap. Footballs are not. At least quality balls are not. Each squad needs a ball per player. Plus a few spares, all coaches and players know that footballs will be lost. Twenty Mitre footballs cost £120. If the football club has ten squads over a £1000 a season is spent on footballs. To have the footballs supplied or subsidised would be a great help and a great saving to each club. There are currently ways for clubs to get help with equipment but not every club receives the benefit of such schemes.
At a basic level these are the things that grassroots clubs really require, from the under 7s to the veterans, they need kit, equipment and players as much as humans need oxygen.
This amount of money should be able to achieve more than basics.
What is the ultimate goal of all of this funding? The FA have a duty to ensure that participation levels remain high and compete against other forms of entertainment (rather than other sports). The larger goal is create a world champion England side. The best route to that is to develop better players.
Two million pounds a year is the annual FA investment in grassroots coach education. A further two million coming from the government. Out of £260 million, £8 million will go on coach development. You can have the greatest facilities in the world but they are worth nothing without well educated coaches. The cost of courses is prohibitive for volunteer coaches at grassroots level. The education of every single footballer begins in grassroots and schools football. The greater the quality of the coaching they receive at a young age, the better chance they have of becoming quality players.

Players need quality coaching far more than quality facilities. In his book the Talent Code Daniel Coyle visited world renowned talent developers. Many of the hotbeds of talent development do not rely on stunning facilities. The great Jamaican sprinting team operate out of little more than a hut. The heartland for the influx of female Russian tennis players was no better than average. The difference between world class and very good was not found in the bricks and mortar but in the calibre of the educators.

 

 

Lowering the cost of the courses will help ensure coaches can afford the education that their players need. However, there is another side to coach education, which is the educators themselves.

 

 

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who watches the watchmen? How about, who coaches the coaches?

 

 

Who are they? What are their credentials? I have had some excellent and engaging tutors on FA courses. I have also had other tutors who have sat somewhere below that standard. Some I know what their body of work comprised before working with the FA. Others I never found that out. The FA need to ensure that they have the best possible people coaching the coaches. The position of FA tutor needs to be attractive enough that top quality coaches will choose to educate rather than coach at club level. It is arguable that the best coach in the country should be working in coach education, not working at a football club. Spend some of the £260 million on quality tuition. If the best youth systems are Dutch, Spanish and German why not employ one of their coach educators? Feyenoord have received the award for the best academy in the Netherlands five years in a row. How much would it cost to bring across one of the academy directors from that period?

 

 

Similarly the County mentors need to be of a high calibre. More mentors are certainly required and spending a portion of the millions on more mentors would be wise. Many coaches are left to their own devices after courses with little assistance. Someone to talk to is always appreciated. The someone has to have sufficient knowledge levels and an understanding of what happens at grassroots level. Coaches need a sympathetic ear to help raise their game.

 

 

Getting the right people in the right place is a better investment than a few more pitches.

 

 

 

Read more at http://www.thefa.com/news/2015/aug/national-game-strategy-2015-2019-launch#5tH1A5eRRuZLGOAx.99http://www.thefa.com/news/2015/aug/national-game-strategy-2015-2019-launch

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/england/11155027/Football-Association-and-Greg-Dyke-launch-230m-3G-revolution-in-grass-roots-facilities-and-coaching.html

Leave a Reply

Close Menu