Is it the fault of the Premier League?

[Cochise]

Whilst I sat watching the Man UTD match today, I began to question the role of the Premier League. You see listening to the commentators absolutely worship Man Utd today annoyed me, especially when they referred to them as one of England's top teams. I mean how is a team containing just two English players a top English team??

Over the course of the last 5-6 years, a question that constantly arises is whether or not the Premier League is to blame for the failings of the national team. Many cite the plethora of foreign players playing in the league as a reason, believeing that clubs too readily purchase average players from abroad instead of bringing through/giving games to their own youth prospects. Whilst this can be easily blamed upon the clubs themselves, it is well known that the financial rewards for staying in the Premier League make the thought of dropping out unbearable. Why take the risk with a decent 18 year old who may cost you points learning their trade over the course of a season, when experienced players from Europe are available for fees that are easily covered by the prize money?

This may be the case within the lower half of the table, but the problem is exacerbated further with the introduction of Champions League places. Those clubs not funded by Oligarchs or Sheikhs are dependant upon that money in the same way that the smaller clubs are dependant upon the Premier League money. The revenue can pay for the wage demands of the best players and contribute towards the purchasing of players that can maintain that clubs status amongst the elite. These players are rarely English, because there are few English players who have experience in Europe's top competitions and those that are cost a lot more than their foreign counterparts.

I'm aware that I am covering old ground so for now lets look at some information I have gathered. I looked at the starting line ups of seven of the top teams from La Liga, the Premier League and the Bundesliga. From Spain I chose, Real Madrid, Barcelona, Atletico, Sevilla, Villareal, Real Sociedad and Valencia. From Germany Bayern Munchen, Borussia Dortmund, Schalke, Bayer Leverkusen, Wolfsburg, Borussia Monchengladbach and Mainz. Finally from England I chose Emirates Marketing Project, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Everton, Spurs and Man UTD. I then looked at how many of each of those teams starting players, played for the home country. For example. This weekend we (Spurs) played with just two English players in our starting eleven. In the case of Liverpool I used their "best XI" including Sterling and Sturridge despite neither starting this weekend, however the other six teams all fielded sides that were close to their first choice.

The results pretty much tell us what we thought we knew, though I am suprised by the numbers. In Spain, all of the teams had 5 or more Spanish players starting, except Real Madrid who only fielded 3. In total, 44 of the 77 players in the starting line ups were Spanish. That's 57.14%.

In Germany 39 of the 77 players in the starting line ups were German. That's 50.64%

In England 20 of the 77 players in the starting line ups were English. A meagre 26%. There were six players from Scotland, Wales, Ireland and Northern Ireland adding up to another 7.79%.

In the case of some squads, there are some clubs that actually have fewer English players in them than there were Spanish players starting for a Spanish club in La Liga. The example I give you is Chelsea. They have two over age English players in their 25 man squad; Terry and Cahill. Even Real Madrid, the team with the poorest representation of Spanish players in the sample had 3 Spanish players in their starting line up. There is some improvement with the other English squads, but only Everton really compare to their European counterparts with a squad that contains 8 Englishmen, 4 Irishmen and a Scot.

So there you have it. A little piece that shows the lack of English players at the top of the game in this country. There are many factors that can be the cause of the current problem, but I do not think the Premier League is innocent in all of this. Whilst we can blame the culture of the game in this country and the lack of decent youth coaching for the last few decades for much of todays problem's, I still find it staggering that there are so few English players that are exposed to European football (both UCL and EL).

 

[thfcsteff]

I find myself increasingly in your frame of thought. The Premiership is becoming akin to a power struggle between the richest of the rich. Take two places away out of the top 4 every season. Now you could argue three. The fourth is only up for grabs in an optimistic sense (usually spend=league position)…

Man Utd have accelerated into a role of the most egregious offenders IMO. Spending obscene money and turfing out their own youth/not focusing on developing them like they used to/not brave enough to bring them through.

It's hard to feel good about the game sometimes…

 

[africanspurs]

Whilst I sat watching the Man UTD match today, I began to question the role of the Premier League. You see listening to the commentators absolutely worship Man Utd today annoyed me, especially when they referred to them as one of England's top teams. I mean how is a team containing just two English players a top English team??

Over the course of the last 5-6 years, a question that constantly arises is whether or not the Premier League is to blame for the failings of the national team. Many cite the plethora of foreign players playing in the league as a reason, believeing that clubs too readily purchase average players from abroad instead of bringing through/giving games to their own youth prospects. Whilst this can be easily blamed upon the clubs themselves, it is well known that the financial rewards for staying in the Premier League make the thought of dropping out unbearable. Why take the risk with a decent 18 year old who may cost you points learning their trade over the course of a season, when experienced players from Europe are available for fees that are easily covered by the prize money?

This may be the case within the lower half of the table, but the problem is exacerbated further with the introduction of Champions League places. Those clubs not funded by Oligarchs or Sheikhs are dependant upon that money in the same way that the smaller clubs are dependant upon the Premier League money. The revenue can pay for the wage demands of the best players and contribute towards the purchasing of players that can maintain that clubs status amongst the elite. These players are rarely English, because there are few English players who have experience in Europe's top competitions and those that are cost a lot more than their foreign counterparts.

I'm aware that I am covering old ground so for now lets look at some information I have gathered. I looked at the starting line ups of seven of the top teams from La Liga, the Premier League and the Bundesliga. From Spain I chose, Real Madrid, Barcelona, Atletico, Sevilla, Villareal, Real Sociedad and Valencia. From Germany Bayern Munchen, Borussia Dortmund, Schalke, Bayer Leverkusen, Wolfsburg, Borussia Monchengladbach and Mainz. Finally from England I chose Emirates Marketing Project, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Everton, Spurs and Man UTD. I then looked at how many of each of those teams starting players, played for the home country. For example. This weekend we (Spurs) played with just two English players in our starting eleven. In the case of Liverpool I used their "best XI" including Sterling and Sturridge despite neither starting this weekend, however the other six teams all fielded sides that were close to their first choice.

The results pretty much tell us what we thought we knew, though I am suprised by the numbers. In Spain, all of the teams had 5 or more Spanish players starting, except Real Madrid who only fielded 3. In total, 44 of the 77 players in the starting line ups were Spanish. That's 57.14%.

In Germany 39 of the 77 players in the starting line ups were German. That's 50.64%

In England 20 of the 77 players in the starting line ups were English. A meagre 26%. There were six players from Scotland, Wales, Ireland and Northern Ireland adding up to another 7.79%.

In the case of some squads, there are some clubs that actually have fewer English players in them than there were Spanish players starting for a Spanish club in La Liga. The example I give you is Chelsea. They have two over age English players in their 25 man squad; Terry and Cahill. Even Real Madrid, the team with the poorest representation of Spanish players in the sample had 3 Spanish players in their starting line up. There is some improvement with the other English squads, but only Everton really compare to their European counterparts with a squad that contains 8 Englishmen, 4 Irishmen and a Scot.

So there you have it. A little piece that shows the lack of English players at the top of the game in this country. There are many factors that can be the cause of the current problem, but I do not think the Premier League is innocent in all of this. Whilst we can blame the culture of the game in this country and the lack of decent youth coaching for the last few decades for much of todays problem's, I still find it staggering that there are so few English players that are exposed to European football (both UCL and EL).

Two words

Salary Cap

 

[Mulletperm]

I find myself increasingly in your frame of thought. The Premiership is becoming akin to a power struggle between the richest of the rich. Take two places away out of the top 4 every season. Now you could argue three. The fourth is only up for grabs in an optimistic sense (usually spend=league position)…

Man Utd have accelerated into a role of the most egregious offenders IMO. Spending obscene money and turfing out their own youth/not focusing on developing them like they used to/not brave enough to bring them through.

It's hard to feel good about the game sometimes…

Becoming??

 

[jts1882]

We failed to qualify for the World Cup in 1974 and 1978, before the PL, and again in 1994, before the PL can be blamed. The PL is more likely to be a symptom of the problem than the cause.

 

[milo]

We failed to qualify for the World Cup in 1974 and 1978, before the PL, and again in 1994, before the PL can be blamed. The PL is more likely to be a symptom of the problem than the cause.

I disagree. The established Premier League clubs have too much power in England and put their interests above everyone else.

 

[Robbo]

I certainly don't think United's golden generation of Beckham, Scholes, Neville, etc. would have made the first team today. Maybe one, maximum two of them. In fact quite a few would probably never even have made the youth teams, as they'd be replaced by more talented youngsters from abroad.

 

[Neymar]

I’m completely against the general consensus of this thread.

The England National Team isn’t suffering because Man Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea etc aren’t playing English players. The reason for England’s poor recent results is due to; some bad luck and a lack of some real elite players. And its precisely because there isn’t that many top top English players that it is a rarity to find English players in top 4 clubs.

The reason why we saw a larger population of English players in the Premier League pre 2000 is simply due to the fact that there was less money in the league, and hence clubs couldn’t attract a better calibre of player.

Look at our midfield from around 2000. Freund, Sherwood, Redknapp, Iversen. Two of them are English. These two, would have no chance of getting into our current midfield because we have a lot more money than we did in the past, and now attract better players. VDV, modric, eriksen, dembele just to name a few. This is not to say that the current crop of Sherwood’s and Redknapp’s aren’t getting chances to play elsewhere. Look at Huddlestone, Livermore and O’hara. Theyre playing for clubs lower in the league or in lower leagues altogether. Ie. They are still getting game time. They are just playing at their level.

The same can be said of Man Utd. I have no doubt someone like Leighton Baines would’ve been signed by Man Utd pre 2000. Baines could easily have been Dennis Irwin’s successor. But Man Utd have become a world brand and gained practically infitinite wealth. Therefore, they could afford to get Evra. Someone who was genuinely one of the top fullbacks in world football. Baines is still playing at his level. He’s not really good enough for a title challenging side in England, that’s why he’s not playing for one of those clubs.

English players are getting chances and game time. This is no different to the pre Premier League era. To get into a current top 4 side, you have to be worldclass. The England National Team have never had an abundance of worldclass players pre-2000, and to think those guys would’ve played for current top 4 sides now is ridiculous.

If anything, I think the rise of the Premier League has been good for England. Young English players have had the chance to develop with elite foreign players and have been able to compete with and against a higher level of competition, and thus, some have developed themselves. The England team in the mid-2000’s had numerous world class players. Lampard, Gerrard, Cole, Ferdinand, Scholes, Campbell, Beckham (just to name a few). I think for these guys, playing with the likes of Zola, Cantona, Henry, Stam etc benefitted them greatly.

 

[Baleforce]

I certainly don't think United's golden generation of Beckham, Scholes, Neville, etc. would have made the first team today. Maybe one, maximum two of them. In fact quite a few would probably never even have made the youth teams, as they'd be replaced by more talented youngsters from abroad.

come on, they'd be starters for pretty much any team at any time

I agree with Neymar, Spain and Italy went through these phases (albeit with lower numbers) before us but still came out the other side and won World Cups.

Generally, the PL has been brilliant for English football, we have these beautiful all seater stadiums you can take your family to, blanket tv coverage and some of the best players in the world coming here. Long may it continue.

 

[scaramanga]

To blame for what? I don't see a problem.

 

[Robbo]

come on, they'd be starters for pretty much any team at any time

Of course they would as fully grown players, but my point is that I think in today's football, they would have had a much more limited chance of developing into the top players that they became. They were obviously talented, but they didn't face competition from imported African/European wonderkids, were given opportunities to keep developing playing PL football, and didn't face as much pressure as is present in the instant gratification-culture of today.

I just think it would have been much, much harder for them today given those factors.

 

[Baleforce]

Of course they would as fully grown players, but my point is that I think in today's football, they would have had a much more limited chance of developing into the top players that they became. They were obviously talented, but they didn't face competition from imported African/European wonderkids, were given opportunities to keep developing playing PL football, and didn't face as much pressure as is present in the instant gratification-culture of today.

I just think it would have been much, much harder for them today given those factors.

sorry, got the wrong end of the stick, yes it may well have been harder today, although that may be more to do with the different attitudes and remits of Fergie and LVG than just the money

 

[Lost Mango]

Of course they would as fully grown players, but my point is that I think in today's football, they would have had a much more limited chance of developing into the top players that they became. They were obviously talented, but they didn't face competition from imported African/European wonderkids, were given opportunities to keep developing playing PL football, and didn't face as much pressure as is present in the instant gratification-culture of today.

I just think it would have been much, much harder for them today given those factors.

They all went out on loan to Preston and Burnely etc and made a success of it at a lower level. Nicky Butt might not have made it but Giggs, Scholes, Beckham and the Nevilles would have.

the problem for me is very poor coaching across the base of the youth pyramid and the lack of desire to push on due to being rewarded too much too young. Young good players have an air of divine right coupled with having made it. Most are poorly advised by agents in it for their cut. Zaha at utd, Rodwell, Sinclair at city, even people like Bostock and Routledge with us. they see the pound signs and jump before they are ready, then they stagnate for 2 or 3 crucial years. I can understand why they do it but they are partly to blame as well. But a lot of our coaching appears to be woeful at the youth level. If we were producing genuine talents in good numbers they would be coming through somewhere.

You would hope competition would spur English kids to greater efforts but it seems they don't like it up 'em.

Dislike Sky and the EPL and the Big Four dominance and the idea that football only started properly in 1992 but the issues are deeper and wider spread then Sky and BT.

 

[Cochise]

I’m completely against the general consensus of this thread.

The England National Team isn’t suffering because Man Utd, Arsenal, Chelsea etc aren’t playing English players. The reason for England’s poor recent results is due to; some bad luck and a lack of some real elite players. And its precisely because there isn’t that many top top English players that it is a rarity to find English players in top 4 clubs.

I agree with you that the problem is mainly to do with the lack of top class English talent and there are various reasons for it. One of those imo though is that with the money available clubs don't need to develop the top talent the national team so badly needs. That ultimately is the problem, clubs in this country during the PL era have used the money to buy in a quick fix and don'tt focus on producing players.


The reason why we saw a larger population of English players in the Premier League pre 2000 is simply due to the fact that there was less money in the league, and hence clubs couldn’t attract a better calibre of player.

Look at our midfield from around 2000. Freund, Sherwood, Redknapp, Iversen. Two of them are English. These two, would have no chance of getting into our current midfield because we have a lot more money than we did in the past, and now attract better players. VDV, modric, eriksen, dembele just to name a few. This is not to say that the current crop of Sherwood’s and Redknapp’s aren’t getting chances to play elsewhere. Look at Huddlestone, Livermore and O’hara. Theyre playing for clubs lower in the league or in lower leagues altogether. Ie. They are still getting game time. They are just playing at their level.

That is the point though, we are no longer a plucky mid table team focussing on staying up and having a decent run in the cups. That team back then was in the same position as the West Ham of today. Now we are a club of a higher calibre and aim to keep up with/challenger the established elite. As a result we spend our money on players from around the world to keep up. There were still quality English players before though. The treble winning UTD side regularly featured Neville, Butt, Beckham, Scholes, Cole and Sheringham as well as having Roy Keane, Irwin and Giggs in the side. There were players of the Redknapp and Sherwood calibre but there were also better players at the top teams.

The same can be said of Man Utd. I have no doubt someone like Leighton Baines would’ve been signed by Man Utd pre 2000. Baines could easily have been Dennis Irwin’s successor. But Man Utd have become a world brand and gained practically infitinite wealth. Therefore, they could afford to get Evra. Someone who was genuinely one of the top fullbacks in world football. Baines is still playing at his level. He’s not really good enough for a title challenging side in England, that’s why he’s not playing for one of those clubs.

A little harsh on Baines. I never saw him as a player that was as good as Ashely Cole, but I don't think he would be out of place in one of the top teams.

English players are getting chances and game time. This is no different to the pre Premier League era. To get into a current top 4 side, you have to be worldclass. The England National Team have never had an abundance of worldclass players pre-2000, and to think those guys would’ve played for current top 4 sides now is ridiculous.

That though isn't entirely the point. The top 4/elite rich clubs are a creation of both the Premier League and Champion's League. There are rich clubs in all the top leagues but it is only this one that seems to have such a heavily financially doped bracket of clubs.

If anything, I think the rise of the Premier League has been good for England. Young English players have had the chance to develop with elite foreign players and have been able to compete with and against a higher level of competition, and thus, some have developed themselves. The England team in the mid-2000’s had numerous world class players. Lampard, Gerrard, Cole, Ferdinand, Scholes, Campbell, Beckham (just to name a few). I think for these guys, playing with the likes of Zola, Cantona, Henry, Stam etc benefitted them greatly.

Those top players learnt from the top senior players at their clubs. Who have they passed their knowledge onto?? Neville on to Rafael? Lampard onto Oscar and Hazard? Cole onto Azpilicueta? Campbell onto Toure? The point is that a lot of the experience they could have passed on is gone, because like it or not most of them have played alongside experienced players from abroad or top youngsters from abroad. Gerrard and Terry are perhaps the only two exceptions, working alongside Hendersen, Sterling and Cahill.

Lets look at a league that isn't a financial monster, like the Dutch league for instance. They have a lot of young players in their teams, gaining a lot of valuable, competitive experience early on. They produce some of the best talents in the world, but because of the lack of money in the league the top players are sold every summer to the richer clubs in Europe. This in turn promotes another generation of young players into the first teams. Because of the smaller wages etc, there are fewer average pro's moving there as there are oppurtunities elsewhere to make more money. My point with Spain and Germany is that even their equivalents to us and Everton are starting plenty of young Spanish and German players. Is that because they don't have the money to go out and buy better or is it because they are developing better players than can be bought? I personally feel it's a combination of the two.

A good example is Real Sociedad. Their starting line up this weekend contained 10 Spaniards. Even Atletico the current Spanish Champions had 7.

We both agree that the lack of English players in the top teams is because of there being a lack of players of that quality. My opinion however is that the financial advantages enjoyed by Premier League clubs is one of the bigger reasons for this, as those advantages allow teams to spend on ready made pros' as opposed to developing their own. Who is to say how any of the young English players of today would do with exposure to the top competitions. Some will not be up to scratch, but some that won't get the chance could be if only given the competitive games. Would Terry or Gerrard have made it to the top had they been born slightly later? Would they have never got a shot and ended up as nearly players at mid table clubs.

 

[clownfoot]

Why would the Premier League, as a brand, care about developing young English players? Every team in the Premier League was contacted last year and told that the main focus of their market was America. That is why a lot teams toured there extensively this summer. Who is going to get more attention if they are on a billboard, Radamel Falcao or Harry Kane? Who is more valuable to the brand?

 

[Neymar]

Those top players learnt from the top senior players at their clubs. Who have they passed their knowledge onto?? Neville on to Rafael? Lampard onto Oscar and Hazard? Cole onto Azpilicueta? Campbell onto Toure? The point is that a lot of the experience they could have passed on is gone, because like it or not most of them have played alongside experienced players from abroad or top youngsters from abroad. Gerrard and Terry are perhaps the only two exceptions, working alongside Hendersen, Sterling and Cahill.

Neville, Lampard, Cole, Campbell would’ve worked with a lot of English youngsters who just didn’t make the grade. But will have been better off for that experience. Some like Wheelchair will pick up that knowledge and potentially become world class (and good enough to play for one of the premier league’s top teams). Others like mcEchran will still unfortunately not make the grade. Thats the nature of football. Young English players are learning from elite players all the time. Whether they make the grade or not is up to them.

Lets look at a league that isn't a financial monster, like the Dutch league for instance. They have a lot of young players in their teams, gaining a lot of valuable, competitive experience early on. They produce some of the best talents in the world, but because of the lack of money in the league the top players are sold every summer to the richer clubs in Europe. This in turn promotes another generation of young players into the first teams. Because of the smaller wages etc, there are fewer average pro's moving there as there are oppurtunities elsewhere to make more money. My point with Spain and Germany is that even their equivalents to us and Everton are starting plenty of young Spanish and German players. Is that because they don't have the money to go out and buy better or is it because they are developing better players than can be bought? I personally feel it's a combination of the two.

Lets look at the Championship (English 2nd tier). Much like the eredivisie, the finances are similar, crowd attendance is similar, and the standard of football is similar too. Theres a lot of young English players in this league learning their trade, gaining all the valuable experiences that you talk of. Young English players who prove themselves at this level will be given opportunities higher up. Just like how top eredivisie players move onto greater leagues. Why do young English players need to play in the premier league? The championship is a good a league as any for players to develop. The standard and finances of the league is on par with many many good European leagues.

If you are talking about the 4th-8th best teams in spain and germany, they are developing from within more than the likes of us simply because our financial capacity dwarfs theirs.

A good example is Real Sociedad. Their starting line up this weekend contained 10 Spaniards. Even Atletico the current Spanish Champions had 7.

We both agree that the lack of English players in the top teams is because of there being a lack of players of that quality. My opinion however is that the financial advantages enjoyed by Premier League clubs is one of the bigger reasons for this, as those advantages allow teams to spend on ready made pros' as opposed to developing their own. Who is to say how any of the young English players of today would do with exposure to the top competitions. Some will not be up to scratch, but some that won't get the chance could be if only given the competitive games. Would Terry or Gerrard have made it to the top had they been born slightly later? Would they have never got a shot and ended up as nearly players at mid table clubs.

Playing mid-bottom level premier league football, and even championship football is a very high level of competition. Definitely a good enough platform for young English players to prove their ability and desire. I would argue Terry, Gerrard etc probably would have made it. Look at the young English players like Wheelchair, oxlade, gibbs, welbeck, chambers, sturridge, Henderson, sterling, jones, smalling, walker, townsend, kane, shaw. These guys are great examples of young English players who are being given chances at the very very top level. If these guys don’t make it, it wont be because they didn’t get a chance at the very top of English football. Even someone like cleverly is a great example of the benefits of the premier league. He is someone who is maybe not quite good enough for the very top level, but because he happened to come through man utd’s academy, he got the chance to learn from some of the best players in the world, and thus, develop his own game.

 

[Danishfurniturelover]

I find myself increasingly in your frame of thought. The Premiership is becoming akin to a power struggle between the richest of the rich. Take two places away out of the top 4 every season. Now you could argue three. The fourth is only up for grabs in an optimistic sense (usually spend=league position)…

Man Utd have accelerated into a role of the most egregious offenders IMO. Spending obscene money and turfing out their own youth/not focusing on developing them like they used to/not brave enough to bring them through.

It's hard to feel good about the game sometimes…

=D>
Not the game you or I grow up with old chap.

 

[Neymar]

Also, contrary to popular belief, in terms of indiviudal talent, England's best crop of players has coincided with the growth of the premier league. Lampard, Gerrard, Owen, Beckham, Scholes, Neville, Ferdinand, Terry, Campbell, Cole, Rooney etc. At one stage of their careers, all of these guys were considered one of the top 5 or so players in their positions. No other generation of the England National team has boasted this depth of world class talent. And to think the the premier league has not played a massive part in the development of these players' careers would be madness imo

 

[Neymar]

Man Utd have accelerated into a role of the most egregious offenders IMO. Spending obscene money and turfing out their own youth/not focusing on developing them like they used to/not brave enough to bring them through.

It's hard to feel good about the game sometimes…

If man utd were adamant on bringing young players through like they have done in the past, they would get left behind by the top 4. and maybe even the teams a notch below that too. players like cleverley would be indispensible to them. and welbeck would be their best player. and evans would be their defensive rock. and ben foster would be in goal. in the past, having players like nicky butt, phil neville, gillespie etc was fine because their opposition's best player was still worse than phil neville . but if you do this (ie. play too many tom clevereley's evans' youngs' welbecks etc) in today's premier league, you get exactly what happend to happened to them under moyes. ie. you finish outside the top 4.

Its nothing to do with not being brave enough to bring through their own. Its that the manchester pool of footballers is not big enough to produce enough top top players to compete in what is now the best league in the world.

 

[Raziel]

So I think you need to do a little more research to make a statement on the impact

- So you have percentage of national players in top 7 sides in each league
- How does that differ to bottom 7 sides (i.e. is there a correlation between club budget and % of national players?)
- What is average cost of non elite national player in those leagues

England has problems at a national level
- Poor/long term coaching choices (why the **** is Hodgson still coach after that WC?)
- Obsession with picking players from Sky 4
- No national style/identity (I've always wondered why England does not try to play a style that replicates the pace/power of EPL)

From the perspective of is it the PL's fault?
- No, simply because that is not the mandate of the PL, that is the mandate of the FA
- Does the PL contribute = yes
- Why, partially because English players are overhyped and as a result desperately overpriced (if Dier had been playing in England, we would have paid 2X/3X the price), the Scum are a perfect example of a bunch of overhyped English players that are earning stupid wages and in reality nothing more than good top level players. Andy Carroll cost around the same thing as Diego Costa and Sergio Aquero ffs!
- English players aren't coached well enough, technical and tactical deficiencies compared to continental peers (if not coaching, the preference of athlete type players vs. technically gifted)