THE SFA and SPFL are “unwilling or incapable” of safeguarding the rights of children in the pro-youth set-up and must have the regulation of the heavily-criticised system taken away from them.
That is the recommendation of Tam Baillie, Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People, which is due to be discussed by the public petitions committee at Holyrood this Thursday.
Baillie made several proposals in a scathing report into Club Academy Scotland (CAS) last year which found the programme was heavily weighted in favour of the 31 clubs involved.
He warned that clubs had to “undergo a significant attitudinal change”, were viewing youth players “purely in terms of investment” and failed to “acknowledge the person in his or her own right”.
A number of measures were approved by the SFA board in the summer as a consequence of the report and their effectiveness will be reviewed by the SFA, SPFL and the Scottish Government at the end of the 2016/17 season.
However, Baillie remains deeply unhappy with many aspects of a controversial set-up and is calling for more to be done – including handing regulation of the system to an outside body.
“I have given credit to the SFA and SPFL where I think they have made improvements,” he said. “However, my overall impression is that they have gone as far as they are prepared to go or are able to do so within their governing structures.
“For real change to occur, external regulation has to be imposed on bodies which, to my mind, are either unwilling or incapable of taking appropriate action to safeguard the rights of children.
“The clubs should be treating our children with a greater degree of respect in terms of the responsibilities they have to them. Strong external scrutiny is required to ensure that appropriate standards are maintained. I do not have confidence in self-regulation.”
Baillie’s appeal comes after one concerned parent - whose nine-year-old son was considered, and eventually rejected, for entry into the pro-youth set-up at two different Ladbrokes Premiership clubs - contacted Herald Sport to urge parents to seriously consider whether to let their child join a “horrible” and “dysfunctional” system.
The father, who asked not to be named in order to protect the identity of his young son, has echoed Baillie’s views and called for there to be greater regulation of the pro-youth set-up after being appalled by his child’s experiences.
“This is a system which must be regulated,” he said. “When we were first contacted by these clubs a lot of other parents said to me: ‘Don’t touch it’. They were right. It’s a horrible system. There are too many kids in it and the clubs care not a jot about the emotions and feelings of the kids.
“I absolutely agree with the children’s commissioner’s report. The best interests of the child are not respected, they are not protected and they are not promoted. There is no control and there is no transparency. The report said it makes a big impact on children. That is exactly our experience. It is traumatic, harsh and often very public. There is no support and encouragement.”
In a joint letter to Baillie last year, Stewart Regan, the SFA chief executive, and Neil Doncaster, the SPFL chief executive, wrote that they “respectfully suggest that a greater understanding of what clubs do is required”.
An anonymous online survey carried out by Donna Martin, the SFA Child Protection and Safeguarding Manager, last year found that over three quarters of 198 players involved in CAS who responded had found their experiences to be positive.
However, David Little, the chief executive of the Scottish Youth Football Association, described the survey as “fundamentally flawed” because only players within CAS, not those who had been released, had been involved.
Jim McInally, the former Dundee United and Scotland player and current Peterhead manager, last year called for the pro-youth system to be scrapped altogether and claimed it was driving youngsters to suicide.
Brian McClair, the former SFA Performance Director, called for the number of children in CAS, currently around 3,000, to be reduced by two thirds before standing down after little over a year in the role in the summer.
The father who contacted The Herald added: “To begin with, my son was training twice a week for two hours. Then I was told his training was being changed. The net affect was one hour’s training as opposed to four hours with the academy.
“I asked the club to make a decision. He played in 20 minutes for the academy out of position, with boys he had never played with, against boys who were two years older than him. I then got a phone call saying he would no longer be required.
“It was appalling. It is not about development. The rights of the child are not respected. He is one of many. You have to give him more than 20 minutes of football. As he was leaving a busload of 10 new kids was arriving. They are going to experience the same issues.
“These children are treated as a number and no more. I haven’t told my son he has been released. I just said: ‘Listen, you’re not enjoying it, let’s come out, I think you’re better at your boys’ club’. You need to manage it so carefully. I can’t imagine how it feels for a 13, 14 or 15-year-old to be released."
The parent continued: “This is not sour grapes. There needs to be independent monitoring now. We have recently seen where the failure to regulate boys’ club football in the past 30 years has taken us. That has now been exposed. I’m not making a link, but there needs to be regulation of this system.
“I have been hugely impressed by what boys’ clubs are achieving. I think at grassroots level change is coming in Scottish football. I hear it said that kids aren’t playing football any more. Sorry, but they are playing. Change is afoot.
“There are thousands of kids playing on the right surfaces at Glasgow Green, Toryglen and elsewhere with an army of volunteers who are dedicated to their development. It is incredibly impressive.
“I don’t want my son anywhere near the dysfunctional pro-youth system. The clubs and football authorities should be supporting the boys’ clubs. Pro-youth is not about developing talent. I don’t know what it’s about.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel