Messi>CR7
GOLD
Playing kickball under pressure in your defensive third against a superior team is fine. But if there is not even a single attempt to pass from GK to fullbacks on goal kicks, then I will also have to respectfully disagree.
Parent perspectives on the cost of competitive youth sports
- Thread starter mirage
- Start date
UCLA is by far a much better team than Duke, secondly Duke was parking the bus with one or 2 players in their own attacking side allowing UCLA to move the ball around without any major challenge to their possession and the reasoning for it, they needed to maintain the line stacked up so whenever the UCLA girls beat them in the line at least take their shooting angle out. If Duke attempted to play high pressure and build up, UCLA would had beat them senseless.
Just watch the highlights of the Liverpool Roma game yesterday and you will see possession gone wrong on both of Mo Salah goals. Maintaining possession and making meaningful accurate passes display great technical skills, however the purpose of the game is to score more goals than the other team, not who controls the ball more.
Ditto!
Guess you never saw the Beach 98' Academy team play 13', 14', 15', and 16'. Further, there are 3 style of play - possession, direct and kickball. Please note I differentiated between direct and kickball. There has been only one team in world football in the last decade at any level that played possession regardless of situation - Barca the years of Pep. Sometimes to a detriment. The new Barca plays possession but also will play direct when the situation is "on". Kickball is chance oriented. Possession and direct are not.
MakeAPlay
DA
Mo Saleh is tearing it up and in great form! Egypt is likely to come second in their group in June.
Regarding the game that I posted a link to. I was at the game and UCLA was definitely the better team and yes Duke for the most part sat back but that was because early on they almost got stung when they tried to pressure UCLA. My point was that UCLA was still able to connect passes. In the games against Stanford both teams played possession although UCLA possessed better the first time and Stanford possessed the ball more in the final. Both games were excellent, technical games with elite athletes all over the field.
MakeAPlay
DA
I saw that team and you are correct. Jeff and Mauricio had them playing excellent soccer for years.
We are on the same page, you just don't see it and going back to your original comment I can see why you felt disappointed of the GDA.
Messi>CR7
GOLD
I have seen my DD (U-little centerback) simply heave the ball when I, as a spectator, thought she had enough time to map out a pass and connect. I've also seen her give away balls in the defensive third when attempting to build out from the back. I'm ok with either of these scenario as long as she is the one making those decisions on the spot. I would have an issue if she is told to boot it every time while under pressure.
I'm probably more annoyed by the "great job" from my wife whenever my DD heaves one aimlessly, but I keep my mouth shut
I'm probably more annoyed by the "great job" from my wife whenever my DD heaves one aimlessly, but I keep my mouth shut
MakeAPlay
DA
I have seen my DD (U-little centerback) simply heave the ball when I, as a spectator, thought she had enough time to map out a pass and connect. I've also seen her give away balls in the defensive third when attempting to build out from the back. I'm ok with either of these scenario as long as she is the one making those decisions on the spot. I would have an issue if she is told to boot it every time while under pressure.
I'm probably more annoyed by the "great job" from my wife whenever my DD heaves one aimlessly, but I keep my mouth shut
My player has played centerback full time since the end of U14. I have seen many errors and many great plays. I only get upset when the play isn't appropriate to the situation. Most of the time that I get upset is because she will pass the ball instead of dribbling forward. Most teams don't know how to defend her team when she breaks the first two lines of pressure with her dribble. Focusing on the process versus the results is usually best for young players at this critical position.
Good luck to you and your player.
outside!
DA
It is also important to remember that the view of the player on the field is much different than our view from the sideline/stands. The players are making split second decisions when they are out of breath and possibly somewhat oxygen deprived. I have asked DD sometimes about a certain part of the game when reviewing video. Sometimes she just messed up, had a bad pass, funny bounce or whatever. Other times she was so tired towards the end of a game that she felt it better to pass the ball than dribble for fear of being dispossessed. Some of the time she points out things that I could not see or know from my viewpoint like another player closing down an angle more quickly than is obvious from the stands or being blinded by the sun.
You do realize some coaches train for these situations, right? My older kid had two different coaches from different clubs purposely do possession drills after they were exhausted. One in particular had them run 5k in Claremont Trails on a hot day, then regular training for 2 hours, followed by possession drills getting ready for a big tournament.
Completely agree about how its different for the players than observers. Having played sports growing up and throughout my adult life, it really is not the same.
outside!
DA
You can train all you want, but you will never push yourself as hard as you will in a game/race. I used to race bikes. No matter how hard I trained, race day was just different. I would find myself practically hallucinating trying to keep up with the fast guys. Needless to say my decision making was somewhat impaired. I no longer pay money to feel like crap, I can do that for free.
Paul Spacey
SILVER ELITE
I see the idea of the coaches’ approach and commend them for thinking outside of the box but it is ultimately flawed. Why? If it’s not game-specific, it won’t help in a game. Nobody does a 5k before playing (although I see the idea behind it) and the 2-hour training thing followed by possession drills is not game-specific; not to mention impossible to maintain the intensity that you are looking for in a game. A better approach would be a practice of the same length as the actual game with an intensity (dictated by coach and pushed by players) and decision making setup (including pressure) which mimics the game directly. ‘Drills’ are a long-established way of coaching soccer but slowly coaches and clubs are realizing that this traditional approach isn’t the most effective way to coach young players.
When you watch any team/coach, you should ask yourself one question; does it look like the real game? If not (i.e passing back and forth with zero decision making or jogging around the field perimeter), then your kid isn’t being effectively served.
I used to race motocross, but not BMX - too much peddling for me....
Of course both you and outside is right about not being the same pressure as a real game. However, it it does put the body and mind into a fatigue condition, where decisions have to be made. The whole purpose of these kind of training is not about simulating the game conditions, but to train players to make decisions when fatigued.
While it may not involved hallucinating, mistakes are more prone to happen and mental strength is weakened. From that perspective, it does what's intended.
Paul Spacey
SILVER ELITE
I agree with you that there are benefits to training decision making under physical and mental fatigue so you’re right, it does a job to an extent.
To clarify though, coaches should always be trying to simulate game conditions as closely as possible. The closer the simulation, the better the transfer into real games and that’s ultimately what you are looking for; better game performance.
This isn’t the way most coaches and clubs I watch actually practice because traditionally lots of isolated drills have been the norm. Coaching courses (and coaches) are improving in that regard though and this will benefit players longer term as more integrated, game-like practices are developed and isolated training becomes less prevalent.
This is actually the central push behind the curriculum of US Soccer....training should be realistic and game like. I actually don't fully agree with the approach. Training must be both technical and realistic. A kid is never going to learn the basics (or clarify the small technical errors) for such core skills like juggling, first touch, passing, goal kicks or crossing under pressure, and the coach won't be able to give each kid the individual attention and corrections then need to improve technique. Kids also benefit tremendously from applying those skills in realistic settings whether 1 v 1, small sided, game scenarios or scrimmage. Training should be a blend of technical and realistic, shifting to less of the technical and more of the realistic as the kids perfect their technique and move up the age and ability ladders. My problem with the US Soccer approach (even after the broke up the E license into specific age related categories) is that it seems to think all kids at all ages should be taught the same....it's why I actually think the AYSO curriculum is just better for the younger ages (it's flaw being largely that it is usually imperfectly taught).
Paul Spacey
SILVER ELITE
There is no perfect right or wrong answer and it’s a complex issue. I don’t want to hikack this thread as we could talk about it for hours and go down the skill acquisition rabbit-hole along with cognitive training and decision making.
I agree there will always be room for technical training. Mostly through individual work though. Isolated technique training isn’t the right choice for a team setting, primarily because there is no opponent or game scenario in which to learn from. The process is completely different cognitively when passing a ball back and forth or doing it in relation to opponents, teammates and space in a designed game for practice.
Juggling isn’t a core skill btw. It’s good for individually working on control (not as good as using a ball and a wall) but it’s not required to be able to play the game (Johan Cruyff talked about this and a circus). Some High schools have juggling as part of tryouts (truly bizarre) and I’m surprised at how much value is placed on it. Juggling on your own is fine; juggling in a team practice is never, ever acceptable (unless the coach has no idea what else to do).
I agree with you completely on the flawed approach of teaching all kids the same way, despite their age. This is a huge mistake and again, I agree with you that some of the AYSO approach at very young ages is excellent. The implementation by coaches with little knowledge of the game is often an issue unfortunately.
I think we agree more than disagree. I personally think isolated technique training is appropriate when the team is still small and the kids are young but should disappear gradually as the kids get up in ranks and high school ages. The thing that irritates me is that US Soccer does tend to agree with you that this should be "mostly through individual work though" but won't come out and say it. I'll repeat it again what I've posted before: I was reprimanded by my instructor during my elicense for putting together a level 2 exercise on crossing using just 1 attacker, 1 receiver and 1 goalkeeper (no pressure, with pressure added with 2 defenders on the level 3) in an exercise geared for 8-9 year old bronze levels. They felt it wasn't game like and even the youngest players need to learn to cross under pressure. I asked "well, where do they learn their technique...you know how to actually physically cross the ball and with accuracy?". They answered "that's what trainers are for". But that's not what most club parents out there think....they think the kid is on their team and that's pretty much all I need because it's the coach's job to teach them. If that's really the philosophy that US Soccer is going for, then they should just come out and say every kid [at least on the younger end] should have a private trainer, parent who knows how to teach, or academy to work on their individual skills (but they can't because they are already under fire for accessibility and rising costs).
As for juggling, every team except the current one my son is on in their try outs [both this year and last] that he attended had a juggling session. And, per the advice of this board, he didn't go to any of the cattle call try outs. It's an easy way for the coaches at the younger levels to weed out those who have ball control v those that don't.
Paul Spacey
SILVER ELITE
We agree on a lot, yes!
US Soccer should be straight and come out and say it, again we agree there. I guess the transition from the outdated traditional model of coaching has been tough for the federation and for coaches and coach educators, so they are taking baby steps. Progress is being made which is the main thing.
As for the juggling at tryouts if I were a parent and a tryout had kids juggling, I’d take my kid somewhere else without taking a breath, maybe after asking the coach before I left, “remind me when my kid needs to juggle in a game again?”