Town have failed in their application to upgrade their academy to category one status. The club was told earlier today that it had missed the required 75 per cent mark in April's audit by just 0.3 per cent.

“We’re obviously disappointed to miss out on category one this time,” academy director Bryan Klug told the club website.

“The staff, in particular Helen Broughton, worked tirelessly to prepare for the audit and we felt confident that our structure is good enough to be granted category one status.

“We’re all disappointed, frustrated but we go again. Getting to category one is our aim and everyone is fully committed to getting there.

“I have spoken to Marcus [Evans, club owner] and he’s as disappointed as the rest of us but he’s fully supportive of us moving forward and continuing to push for category one.

“We have made a lot of progress over the past year and we will continue to make progress.

“We will be audited again next season and we will be doing everything we can to achieve category one status because that puts us in the best position to produce young footballers for Ipswich Town.”

The academy will remain at category two which means, amongst other things, that they will face the likes of Colchester United and Brentford at U21 and U18 levels next season. They will also receive a Premier League grant of £480,000, compared with a category one grant of £775,000.

Photo: Action Images

AbujaBlue added 16:12 - Jul 24 Will there be an appeal? 0.3% is a ridiculous margin to have such effort and investment amount to nothing.
27

bring_back_Wickham added 16:12 - Jul 24 Because 0.3% makes such a difference
2

carlisleaway added 16:17 - Jul 24 That is ridiculous, as a company we regularly have to obtain ISO 9001 and ISO 14001. If we seem to be failing in a particular area we are told and the necessary area corrected. Perhaps we can spend the money that was going on Category 1 on a decent striker or midfield player.
2

Lord_Mac added 16:19 - Jul 24 With such a narrow margin, the club should have been given action points to address and allowed to pass subject to addressing them. It sounds like they are trying to stop us passing, rather than helping us to pass. There should definitely be an appeal. Of course, had we gone for Cat One status in the first place, as we all wanted, when it was being set up, we'd have been one of the club and it would have been much easier. Clegg out!!!

20

Stourbridgeblue added 16:20 - Jul 24 If only we'd repainted the turnstiles.
16

BlueandTruesince82 added 16:26 - Jul 24 I think the amount of time the whole decision has taken shows what a mess the whole system is. The one thing Clegg got right was when he said new system had been designed as a closed shop for the top Premier League clubs. That plus FFP are designed to increase the gulf as misguided foreign owners try to lead us to a point where there is no relegation and instead create a franchise model to protect their investment. Fortunately English football will never resort to that as no non prem club will ever agree to it. .3%? what does it even mean? Was the grass to long? The white lines not white enough?

13

carlisleaway added 16:32 - Jul 24 Norwich are in Category 1 and understand that they are kicking local players out of there Youth Policy to get better quality players from the London area.
2

Michael11 added 16:34 - Jul 24 Missing out by 0.3% must be hard to take. At least we're very close and will know how to improve that little bit to get us there next year. Hopefully we'll actually try and develop players like Marriott, Henshall, Wyatt etc. I don't think much youth has come through at all since Connor Wickham.
1

jpring89 added 16:35 - Jul 24 joke .3 % yeah whatever your telling me that the .3% we needed really mattered so much so if we got 74.7% surely thats rounded up to 75%
1

Marcus_Evans added 16:37 - Jul 24 We can't spend the money on the first team as the money has already been spent to try and get Category 1, plus academy spending doesn't count under FFP
2

StowTractorBoy added 16:38 - Jul 24 0.3% - how absolutely absurd that we fail on such a small margin. It has taken long enough to get this decision so surely another week or two to bring us up to the status required could have been permitted. I too believe category one is a bit of a closed shop and feel sorry for the likes of Simon Milton who works tirelessly for the academy cause. One wonders if we are flogging a dead horse ?

2

Tampa_Florida_Blue added 16:51 - Jul 24 While most of you are seeing this as a glass half empty, I'm taking the other view, the glass half full. This may be a blessing. We hardly set the world on fire as a cat 2 club. It felt to me like we was getting by, rather than fully functional youth setup. An extra season in cat2 might help us get o cat1 a better team. Sorry for who don't agree with me, but that's my opinion and we are.all allowed one !

4

jas0999 added 17:33 - Jul 24 Madness. Surely there is an appeals process?
1

JustSpivvyChops added 17:39 - Jul 24 CLEGG OUT!!!!!!!!!! KLUG OUT!!!!!!! EVANS OUT!!!!!! MCARTHY OUT!!!! TC OUT!!!!!!! OUT OUT OUT OUT OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUT
-5

Jaffe added 17:43 - Jul 24 2nd class in every depatment
-1

greenkingtone added 18:03 - Jul 24 As a former Quality Manager, I would love to know how the auditors measure fractions of 1% and what tolerances are applied. Here is a definition of an auditor. "An auditor is someone who goes around after the battle and shoots the wounded." I above posters are quite correct.
2

Moscow_Blue added 18:09 - Jul 24 Really disappointing. Still, I assume we now know what gaps to close and will get there next season when we will, of course, be in the Premiership. COYB!
1

Mark added 18:11 - Jul 24 Are we able to fact check the audit report to make sure it doesn't include any errors or incorrect assumptions? I presume it is clear where we fell short so we can address those areas and make absolutely sure we pass next year? Hopefully this is just a one year delay.
3

Steelmonkey added 18:17 - Jul 24 Perhaps now it can be seen what a mistake it was downgrading the academy in the first place. Not only do we see what exacting standards have to be met to get that status back, but we now see that up and coming talented youngsters arn't that attracted to going to a club that isn't cat 1, hence the lack of talent at our club, and just a shocking season we have had from our "reserves". As for appealing the decision, we haven't made the grade and that's that, a standard is set for a reason. Well done lads for the 3 - 0 win, only Colchester but a good workout. COYB's

2

ntoms97 added 18:24 - Jul 24 Hey ho try again next year we might get 100 just to shove it in the face of those officials
0

DurhamTownFan added 19:07 - Jul 24 I'm not sure what to make of this. Obviously it sounds better to have 'one' rather than 'two', but is it going to make a difference to Kulg's expert training of the young lads? Perhaps it's more about budgest and reputation, showing off the facilities to potential signings than actually what happens on the ground. Judging by the performance of our U-21 team last year, we need a little bit more time anyway! Another angle: perhaps we should be a little bit pleased that someone at the FA is taking youth development seriously enough to make up a rigorous categorisation procedure? That's not a pessimistic point against Ipswich, but more a note that these tests probably exist for a reason and that we should be kind of glad they are in place.

3

RegencyBlue added 19:50 - Jul 24 The decision not to go for Cat 1 status right at the start of all this comes back to haunt us! Clegg should have spent more time dealing with the real issues facing the club rather than having the turnstiles painted!!
4

Hoppersblue10 added 19:52 - Jul 24 0.3% I ask you, surely that is worth an appeal or something. In my job I get Audited around 3-4 times a year, some is down to interpretation, a margin that small surely needs to be challenged.?
3

RYITFC added 20:07 - Jul 24 I expect that they've got to be seen not to pass everyone & it looks like we're the one they've chosen! Would like to see how this is calculated & where we have fallen short!
2

Plums added 20:37 - Jul 24 Totally agree with many of the comments here. A corrective action plan should be produced and an audit revisit done within an agreed timeframe. This sounds like a very old fashioned approach to audit. I assume many of the measures were qualitative and yet a quantitative result has been provided. It sounds an interesting framework and obviously doesn't use the major and minor non-conformity approach so beloved of ISO auditors; I wonder why not.

2

Blogs 295 bloggers

Ipswich Town Polls