[Albion] Simon Rusk interview - The Guardian

[Super Steve Earle]

So have you and the boys of the NSC Geheime Staatspolizei any opinion about the big Slovakian striker from a mid-table French team, spotted at Lancing?
Think he'll sign?....what's the fee, if he does?
Is he a forward, or a replacement for one of the centre-backs?

Big Slovakian STRIKER.
Is he a forward or a replacement centre back?

Think you've let yourself down a bit there!

 

[Hu_Camus]

really?
Is he a striker.....or is he cover for one of the centre backs possibly going for big money?...six two-ish apparently.
Point is, who knows?

 

[Machiavelli]

Genuinely curious as to how someone comes on in the 90th minute and looks overwhelmed?

I just had a(nother) look at your initial post in this thread, in which you didn't seem certain that Connolly played 60 seconds. I don't have recourse to any stats on it, but my (often failing) memory tells me that he had a run out for about 10 minutes, and found it difficult given the strength, speed and physicality that he was up against. To be fair to him, he was up against defenders with PL experience, but that kind of makes my point -- he's not ready at that level.
I agree with you, however, that certain DS players deserved more minutes in the cup, but the ones that I think are the most promising weren't available: Connolly snapped his hamstring and then went out on loan IIRC; and Molumby was on the long road back from two injuries that kept him out for c21 months. Given how well he did at Newport, Ben White probably deserved something too. But, then again, Balogun and Burn might just have had a better shout.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I stand by the fact that Dunk and March were tipped to become Premier League players in the future and March certainly has an interest from Southampton before Hughton's arrival. You would also not be wrong by saying they developed under Hughton. Not sure why you feel I have to be wrong and yourself right on this as it's not important.

Both comments are not mutually exclusive however as I asked regarding my actual point in the original comment; Why only give 15 seconds to a player and what would be psychology and purpose behind it? It is not an unreasonable or a trick question.

Southampton were never interested in March. His own family denied the rumour.

 

[The Brighton Buzz]

Gyokeres has played the most minutes, and did have one good run and IIRC a weak shot but he looked way, way short of PL standard.

If my memory serves me right the senior players playing that day were absolutely gash. Gyokeres came on and did make a difference. There were several times last season when senior players had the chance to impress CH to get into the starting 11 but did not take it. That day Gyorkeres looked no worse that the others in fact probably tried too hard to impress. Adding one or two U23 to the match day squad would not have weakened the team in my eyes and certainly would have given some legs on the bench to what had been a pedestrian midfield/upfront. Wholesale changes no, opportunities to see if good enough yes. Gyorkeres showed he was just as good as some senior players on the day. So let’s not make them scape boats when they get a few minutes. We will never know if they are good enough if we don’t give them game time. 20 mins here and there. Not 15 seconds or bring them on when the team are playing awful and expect an U23 player to turn things round. CH didn’t trust the U23’s and if the truth be known half of the first team squad who got little time to bed in. Half of the new players did not get game time before Christmas and only played after that because of our form. You can argue that results showed that they were not good enough. My view is they were thrown in to save the day having not played with each other before. Almost like a pre season. The money we paid CH should have had the confidence involving them from the start of the season then they would have been ready. CH confidence in players did not stop at the U23’s it carried on to the 1st team.

 

[Gwylan]

So let’s not make them scape boats when they get a few minutes.

Is a scape boat someone who's completely out his depth but gets the blame anyway? Or is it a goalkeeper who ships goals?

 

[The Brighton Buzz]

Is a scape boat someone who's completely out his depth but gets the blame anyway? Or is it a goalkeeper who ships goals?

Ha ha very good. Teach me not to proof read before posting.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Is there not a whole host of middle ground between ‘playing them regardless’ and giving them less than 2% of the minutes available. It’s understandable that we didn’t want to risk throwing young players in to league games, however I don’t think it’s unreasonable to expect them to get more of a chance in the cup. Let’s be honest, we treated it as a distraction until a route to the semis dropped in to our lap. I don’t think I’m being too extreme to think the likes of Molumby, Sanders, Ostigard & Sanchez deserves some minutes, or that Gyokeres deserved to start more than one game.

At the expense of who? Go back to the fixtures, look at the lineups and I'd be glad to discuss who you would have given less minutes to. We were desperate to get Andone, Jahanbakhsh, Locadia, Bissouma, Kayal, into some kind of form, as well as match sharpness for Bruno, Burn, Balogun, Bong who weren't getting starts at that time. There were threads crying out for more game time for them. They are the players you're benching to give the youngsters minutes.

Maybe you are right, but it would be at the expense of first team squad players not starting league games as much themselves.

I'll also remind you that these boards were littered with furious threads regarding playing our strongest possible sides in the cup. That might not have been you, but I can imagine the uproar had we lost in the 3rd round with a load of kids in the side at Bournemouth.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Granted. He is, quite clearly. But are our lot? I don't think any of those given a chance showed that they're good enough to make the match-day PL squad. Molumby (who has been out injured for c21 months) and Connolly look the best options, but I think they need time playing at, say, Championship level to see if they can make the match day 18 with us. That's what Kane and Lingard did, for instance. Potter might think differently.

And don't forget the January signings - Mac Allister ( maybe ), Baluta ( Romanian Cup final appearance ) and Mlakar.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Yes - or to put it another way, 224 appearances..........................

I don't really know what your point is?

I'm simply saying we haven't been a club that has bought youth through the system very often, you're backing that up really.

Cook played 3 first team games for us, he's now played 133 Premier League games for Bournemouth, we sold him on because we preferred the glamour of bringing a big name like Upson in, rather than stick with a youth partnership of Dunk and Cook.

 

[Rich Suvner]

https://www.theguardian.com/footbal...youth-teams-reality-brighton-coach-simon-rusk

Interesting piece, spelling out just how hard the path is to bridge the gap from the U23's to actually playing in the PL.

Hughton was reluctant to promote too many youngsters. “I can’t blame him for not giving younger players an opportunity,” says Rusk. “To play a young player you’ve got to put three, four or five noses out of joint in the dressing room. So, unless it’s an absolute screaming talent, it’s a hard thing to do."

"For some of our players, the perceived gap between 23s and getting in the first team has got a lot bigger and, with that, there is a naturally enhanced level of disillusion in one or two of them"

"We don’t hold the motivating carrot of first-team football here."

What an utterly bizarre thing to say. I can't imagine Everton, Saints, Swansea, Palace or West Ham saying something like that!!!!

 

[Whitechapel]

At the expense of who? Go back to the fixtures, look at the lineups and I'd be glad to discuss who you would have given less minutes to. We were desperate to get Andone, Jahanbakhsh, Locadia, Bissouma, Kayal, into some kind of form, as well as match sharpness for Bruno, Burn, Balogun, Bong who weren't getting starts at that time. There were threads crying out for more game time for them. They are the players you're benching to give the youngsters minutes.

Maybe you are right, but it would be at the expense of first team squad players not starting league games as much themselves.

I'll also remind you that these boards were littered with furious threads regarding playing our strongest possible sides in the cup. That might not have been you, but I can imagine the uproar had we lost in the 3rd round with a load of kids in the side at Bournemouth.

The second string playing and getting minutes was pointless when no matter how well the played they were never going to get in the first team. Hughton had his favourites, so barring a disaster Balogun and Burn weren’t going to play; when Ryan was here he was always going to start. If they had a chance to fight for a first team place I’d agree to an extent with not playing the kids, but with a lot of the positions picking himself I feel like not playing the kids was simply to appease the fringe senior players.

However even if you consider that, there was no reason why there couldn’t have been more youth players given meaningful minutes off the bench. We went 3-1 up against Bournemouth in the 64th minute. Gyokeres came on in the 91st minute. That; to me, is poor. There was no reason why a couple of the kids couldn’t have got a solid 20 minutes with the first team there, rather than bringing in March & Montoya.

 

[Icy Gull]

"We don’t hold the motivating carrot of first-team football here."

What an utterly bizarre thing to say. I can't imagine Everton, Saints, Swansea, Palace or West Ham saying something like that!!!!

And to compound it we don’t even have the stick to go with the carrot

 

[Whitechapel]

I just had a(nother) look at your initial post in this thread, in which you didn't seem certain that Connolly played 60 seconds. I don't have recourse to any stats on it, but my (often failing) memory tells me that he had a run out for about 10 minutes, and found it difficult given the strength, speed and physicality that he was up against. To be fair to him, he was up against defenders with PL experience, but that kind of makes my point -- he's not ready at that level.
I agree with you, however, that certain DS players deserved more minutes in the cup, but the ones that I think are the most promising weren't available: Connolly snapped his hamstring and then went out on loan IIRC; and Molumby was on the long road back from two injuries that kept him out for c21 months. Given how well he did at Newport, Ben White probably deserved something too. But, then again, Balogun and Burn might just have had a better shout.

BBC & FlashScores have him coming on in the 90th minute, FWIW

 

[Bold Seagull]

The second string playing and getting minutes was pointless when no matter how well the played they were never going to get in the first team. Hughton had his favourites, so barring a disaster Balogun and Burn weren’t going to play; when Ryan was here he was always going to start. If they had a chance to fight for a first team place I’d agree to an extent with not playing the kids, but with a lot of the positions picking himself I feel like not playing the kids was simply to appease the fringe senior players.

However even if you consider that, there was no reason why there couldn’t have been more youth players given meaningful minutes off the bench. We went 3-1 up against Bournemouth in the 64th minute. Gyokeres came on in the 91st minute. That; to me, is poor. There was no reason why a couple of the kids couldn’t have got a solid 20 minutes with the first team there, rather than bringing in March & Montoya.

That is not true though is it. Andone played well in the cup, and got starts ahead of Murray. Andone's red card, and then subsequent injury set him back, but his performances in the cup contributed to him getting starts in the first team as it did Bissouma.

We've been incredibly fortunate not to have more suspensions of injuries with Dunk or Duffy, but Burn and Balogun were ready if they did. Our wide players and fullbacks did change due to form as well during the season.

Look at the appearances over the course of the season, 18 players got 10 or more PL appearances, 16 got 20 appearances or more, 21 players were used in the PL over the season. Your narrative is a bit of a nonsense that CH only had favourites. The first team squad was well used, given 1 was a 3rd keeper and 2 of them were out on season long loans.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Interesting points made above. Then I look at 20 year old Trent Alexander-Arnold. Playing most of the season for Liverpool and in the Champions League Final.

Which makes me think that age is just a number. Are you good enough or not?

This. Rashford, Sancho, Rice.....

 

[GT49er]

I don't really know what your point is?

I'm simply saying we haven't been a club that has bought youth through the system very often, you're backing that up really.

Cook played 3 first team games for us, he's now played 133 Premier League games for Bournemouth, we sold him on because we preferred the glamour of bringing a big name like Upson in, rather than stick with a youth partnership of Dunk and Cook.

You don't know what my point is? I'm not sure if you're playing dense or not ...........................
You attempted to rubbish my post by pointing out that prior to CH, only 4 players in 8 years got a chance, which showed - according to you - that CH was no worse at bringing youth through than any of his predecessors. I pointed out that between them those 4 players were given 224 chances in the Brighton 1st.team, compared to ......... well, tell me, just how many games have youngsters played in the 1st.team under Hughton?
I rest my case (which is a polite way of saying I'm not going to bother arguing any more!).

 

[schmunk]

BBC & FlashScores have him coming on in the 90th minute, FWIW

https://www.transfermarkt.com/spielbericht/index/spielbericht/3093812

 

[Bold Seagull]

You don't know what my point is? I'm not sure if you're playing dense or not ...........................
You attempted to rubbish my post by pointing out that prior to CH, only 4 players in 8 years got a chance, which showed - according to you - that CH was no worse at bringing youth through than any of his predecessors. I pointed out that between them those 4 players were given 224 chances in the Brighton 1st.team, compared to ......... well, tell me, just how many games have youngsters played in the 1st.team under Hughton?
I rest my case (which is a polite way of saying I'm not going to bother arguing any more!).

It still backs up what I'm saying as far as I'm concerned. Elphick's 153 were all League One bar 1, then he was shipped as not deemed good enough for the Championship despite then making over 120 appearances in the Championship and 12 in the PL thereafter. Cook only got 3 appearances in total, Fenelon 2 appearances. Forster Caskey did really well with 67. Lets not forget these appearances were all over different managers too, rather than 1 manager with a particular eye on youth.

March under Hughton has 112 appearances, Dunk 171. 283 appearances of players under Hughton from our development.

I'll rest my case on that.

 

[Bold Seagull]

https://www.transfermarkt.com/spielbericht/index/spielbericht/3093812

So forgot Will Collar and Ben Barclay both played a full 90 in the League Cup. Gykores played 196 first team minutes in total.