Cellular wrote:Damunk wrote:So, someone please tell us how a coach would deliberately choose players
they think can beat the MRI test.
What are the criteria that they have perfected? The medical world would like to know.
What are the characteristics that a player would show to indicate to a coach that he could 'beat' the MRI?
Shortness?
Tallness?
Heaviness of voice?
Thickness of wrists and ankles?
Penile size?
Scrotal rugosity?
This is one of those theories that rapidly gains popularity but falls down on even a little scrutiny.
Until someone can suggest what the coaches might be using as a yardstick, the suggestion that this is what they do sounds preposterous. I don't even think consultant orthopedic surgeons or consultant radiologists could pick them out just by looking at them or watching them run around with a football.
That the coaches are choosing players they know or suspect might be overage is one thing.
But that they deliberately choose players
they think can beat the MRI is something else.
Surely, I'm oviously missing something here, but I'm open to new knowledge.
They know the test is not perfect. So they keep trying their luck. Because in the past they have had players who passed the test who were not under the age cutoff.
Cellular,
While it is possible a player that is over age passes the test, it is also possible that a player under the age fails the test. I hope we agree on this. Thus, even if you are to verify a player's actual age, you will still have some of them fail the MRI test in Nigeria or any African country where MRI is used based on current FIFA requirement. As you will agree with me, that will not be cheating since the ages are verified initially. But let me move on.
One thing that I have not written on here is the 2009 test compared to the test today. It seems to me, clearly now, that people think the same procedures were in place. I state this because of the constant reference to Fortune Chukwudi
https://www.fifa.com/development/news/y ... 21679.html (Note the last few paragraphs). Please note that in 2009 the federations were asked to carry out MRI tests but it was not something that was mandated as I recall. There were stories that Chukwudi failed but still included in the squad and there were stories that he actually passed the test. Which of those is correct? I am uncertain. However, one thing for sure is he was not just over age but well over age and could not have possibly passed the test. His inclusion was clearly fraudulent. Unfortunately, this was a period that CAF did not have its own test to check on what is done at the local units.
The system has changed since, in various ways. Please take note of this when you follow this argument:
1. CAF has a check in its competition today. As you may know, several players failed at the East African qualifiers this year. Wilfred Ndidi and a few others failed after passing the Nigerian test in 2015. You may ask? How is it you can pass one test but not the other? It can happen. For instance, Ndidi passed the test as a Grade 6 which means bones nearly fused. Months later (possibly with bones now fused) he failed the CAF test. Note that among the 15 players who failed the test this year are actually players who were grades 5 and 6 meaning they actually passed the MRI test but the NFF is not taking the risk it did with likes of Ndidi because those are guys whose wrists will possibly fuse before both the CAF and FIFA tests and, thus, will eventually fail. Let's bear that in mind and also note that some of these players may well have been under 17!
2. NFF selects players at U13 and U15 in preparation for having players at the correct age. Note that even this does not assure that they will pass the test! This is not because they are not within correct age but simply because of error in the MRI. But you cannot trust that those players will develop well football wise by the time they get to 17. Thus, there are new players (who did not play at U15 and U217 levels) who must be introduced come U17 time because there is need to get players, within the eligibility age, who are playing well at the U17 selection time.
3. Note that FIFA, beyond just CAF, does a test at the FIFA tournament. FIFA has never released these results. They claim it is used to further the study of the use of MRI. It is quite possible that at that level not just some of the African players but players from USA, Europe and elsewhere actually fail this test. Note also that by the time the FIFA tournament takes place, players who are actually over the stated age of eligibility are regarded eligible. In essence, the competition is really a U18 (see Dvorak's note on this). This means, several possibly fail the test at the tournament. However, think about this -- can FIFA possibly deny those guys in Europe and America where birth certificates are accurate? I think not because they have birth certificates that are likely accurate compared to those from Africa and Asia. If FIFA was to deny players who fail at this level, it will have a major issue in its hands and thus it is convenient to claim a continuation of a study with their results! Just a note, at a previous FIFA competition, as many as 35% of players failed the test (see Dvorak studies) -- that indicates to me that it was not just African and Asia players that fail this MRI test).
4. We have had one claim by an academy owner (Ugbowo) stating how the process occurs, at least as it pertains to his squad. Although it is just one example, it provides a glimpse of how NFF may be picking up some of these boys. His example does not support the view that the NFF is deliberately picking up over age players.
IMHO, I think NFF is doing the best that it can to work with the MRI system by using young players likely to be eligible. If anything, going by an article posted a while back by Txj, one can argue that the system (MRI) may adversely affect African players. But that is neither here nor there. I state this because since the Dvorak test, we know that several other tests have been conducted in Senegal, Egypt, and Ghana besides Algeria which was included in the initial test. All the tests, with exemption of Ghana, support the initial MRI research results. Now why was Ghana result different? Take a look at selection of sample for that study. The researchers accepted the age submitted by Ghana footballers and used that to compare the test results and it was all over the place. The question is: Were the ages submitted by those players accurate in the first place?