Building from the Back

[Grace T.]

I'm not suggesting to just boot the ball. I'm suggesting kids shouldn't be held hostage to one style of play, particularly a pure possession style. No one plays full tiki-taka anymore because its no longer is effective. Teams figured it out. Also a strict possession style seems to go hand in hand with joysticking. Focusing on one style of play is one of the reasons kids don't develop soccer IQ. There is a time and place for possession and there is a time and place to send the long ball.

A blasted, non-directed keeper punt or goal kick drives me as crazy as a negative pass to preserve possession when you could send a high percentage long ball to your wing in space.

I will add that most people who complain about "boot ball", are the ones whose kids team lost to a team that played more direct.

A non-directed kick is what you are going to get though if everyone pushes up (other than on a fast distribution before the other side is ready) because everyone is going to be marked and everyone is going to bunched near the center circle.

The tension is that unless the coach removes the option, teams will tend to revert back to a non-directed kick just to relieve the pressure (since everyone gets punished by shame or getting yelled at for a goal against and people will always choose pain avoidance over a lower reward such as the off chance of starting a breakaway).

I'll share a story. My kid was on a letter league team where he split time with another GK. The other goalkeeper could not play with his feet. The few times he tried to play high and in support of the back he caused a couple disasters so he had a tendency to sit on the line, boot the ball on goalkicks and put the team into a defensive low block. My son was trained in the sweeper keeper style and is constantly playing high which pushes the CBS out of any sort of position to low block. Oil and water. The coach's preference was to play in my son's style. However, mid season the club lost it's center backs and had to put the alternates into first string. The alternates had a very hard time playing the coach's style and would constantly lose the ball leading to a counter attack. The coach was confident that they would get there, but the parents rebelled and demanded to know why he wasn't playing the game safer. The players also preferred the other goalkeeper because it meant they didn't have to take responsibility (I swear my kid's Latino league cbs at least want the ball) because the parents would go off on them if they gave up the ball. Got so bad the parents approached the coach demanding he play the other GK because it just leads to fewer chances against. It didn't wind up turning around the team's fortunes, but they did give up fewer goals against.

 

[watfly]

How can Southampton have only 8 Total Passes when they have 15 Long Passes? And looking up the table, Tottenham is even worse -- 5 and 20.

Their rankings chief, not quantity.

 

[watfly]

A non-directed kick is what you are going to get though if everyone pushes up (other than on a fast distribution before the other side is ready) because everyone is going to be marked and everyone is going to bunched near the center circle.

The tension is that unless the coach removes the option, teams will tend to revert back to a non-directed kick just to relieve the pressure (since everyone gets punished by shame or getting yelled at for a goal against and people will always choose pain avoidance over a lower reward such as the off chance of starting a breakaway).

I'll share a story. My kid was on a letter league team where he split time with another GK. The other goalkeeper could not play with his feet. The few times he tried to play high and in support of the back he caused a couple disasters so he had a tendency to sit on the line, boot the ball on goalkicks and put the team into a defensive low block. My son was trained in the sweeper keeper style and is constantly playing high which pushes the CBS out of any sort of position to low block. Oil and water. The coach's preference was to play in my son's style. However, mid season the club lost it's center backs and had to put the alternates into first string. The alternates had a very hard time playing the coach's style and would constantly lose the ball leading to a counter attack. The coach was confident that they would get there, but the parents rebelled and demanded to know why he wasn't playing the game safer. The players also preferred the other goalkeeper because it meant they didn't have to take responsibility (I swear my kid's Latino league cbs at least want the ball) because the parents would go off on them if they gave up the ball. Got so bad the parents approached the coach demanding he play the other GK because it just leads to fewer chances against. It didn't wind up turning around the team's fortunes, but they did give up fewer goals against.

Your son plays the correct way. A keeper should be playing the ball far more with their feet than their hands. I'm always amazed the significant time spent training a keeper to make diving saves (somewhat rare in a game) vs. the relatively limited time spent on working on distributing the ball with their feet (which should be happening often in a game).

 

[watfly]

In my narrow experience:
- My son's team coaches tiki-taka exclusively, per the rigid uniform style mandated by the technical director. They don't practice anything else, they don't coach anything else, and any play not in that style is generally criticized by the coaches (no matter the game circumstance), as per the technical direction for the club.
- They lose because of this, because (as noted) other teams have figured this out, and they are not perfectly skilled, so they miss passes, traps, are slow on the ball, rarely attack, etc.
- They tend to lose to teams which play direct, and exploit weaknesses on long balls, in part because they never train against this. Almost all their training is on small field areas, and they rarely if ever have long passes in any training session.
- Some of the players will send balls long in games (generally, those with higher soccer IQ, and/or parental coaching also). These are sometimes criticized by coaches and/or players, and sometimes not, usually depending on outcomes.
- The team is pitifully and laughably bad with handling long balls (direct plays, free kicks, corners, etc.). They simply didn't ever practice this, based on the technical direction and training planning from that.
- There's also a strong emphasis on futsal, with even older teams having futsal practice sessions.

Now, I hope this leads to kids who are perceived as more skilled at higher levels (because they play possession soccer). It's pretty clearly not "winning" soccer, but the general consensus among the coaches (and some parents) is that it's "good" soccer. They are getting better at short, quick passing; we shall see if that translates into being perceived as "good" players down the road.

There are so many red flags in there with the exception of playing futsal. It sounds like the ultimate in joysticking players. I favor possession but this is over the top. Huge difference between style vs effective soccer, or effective development.

I sense you understand how this coaching is going to impede developing his soccer IQ. Based upon your description it sounds like the players are too young to be implementing possession tactics. (that's another issue I have with American youth soccer, trying to teach tactics before players have the skills to execute the tactics) If he's learning skills and first touch, and he's happy, it may not be the worst place to be, but knowing what I know now, I'd pull my own kid.

 

[LASTMAN14]

How can Southampton have only 8 Total Passes when they have 15 Long Passes? And looking up the table, Tottenham is even worse -- 5 and 20.

How can Southampton have only 8 Total Passes when they have 15 Long Passes? And looking up the table, Tottenham is even worse -- 5 and 20. Please read the statement above the

Their rankings chief, not quantity.

And I thought rankings would be easier to read then the actual numbers.

 

[sigmabody]

I sense you understand how this coaching is going to impede developing his soccer IQ. Based upon your description it sounds like the players are too young to be implementing possession tactics. (that's another issue I have with American youth soccer, trying to teach tactics before players have the skills to execute the tactics) If he's learning skills and first touch, and he's happy, it may not be the worst place to be, but knowing what I know now, I'd pull my own kid.

It's always tough... they are the coaching "professionals", and I'm just a somewhat knowledgeable parent. I could pull my kid and look elsewhere, but the club is local (city club, convenient), and the coaches are convinced that this approach is the best way to have players perceived as "good" by higher level clubs and schools. And to their credit, they have had a few kids go from the club to academy teams, so they might be right.

I suppose if I was very vested in my kid's soccer career, I'd probably think about this a lot more. However, as my kid isn't likely to be a star player, and isn't even playing on the highest level team for his age (which is an NPL team at the club), optimizing his training isn't something that I spend a large amount of time thinking about. He's going into HS next year, and there's probably only a 50/50 chance we continue to play club next year anyway (based on not wanting to spend $6k/yr with no real college soccer prospect), so even if the training style isn't optimal, it's not the end of the world for us.

 

[Jamisfoes]

If Player A makes a 50-yard diagonal pass up the field to his Teammate Player B, and Player B maintains control of the ball, is that not "possession"?

It depends on the success rate of this happening. If A successfully does this 70% of times than yes I would call that possession. But if he is connecting with B 1 out of 5 times, I would call it “kick ball”.

 

[Orangeteam]

For a team to build out from the back game after game the entire team really has to have the skill, comfort, vision, patience, and IQ to play that way. That's difficult to do at the youth level even without a counter defense to it in a game.
You can also play more long balls instead, but that requires the same skill level, but it's executed differently where you have to have the skill to place that ball 25+yards exactly where it needs to be, and a forward or winger who can actually do something with the ball.

Even at the YNT level they struggle with playing out of the back, or even hitting precision the long balls.
The U16s just played Spain twice last week. They lost and tied and it was a poor showing for any style of play.
The build up from the back didnt' work well, and even at this level it exposes how the kids havent grasped the correct movement, correct passing texture, and the stress of playing in their own defensive 1/3rd.

At the youth level all styles of play can be countered by pressing the backline and the keeper, or isolating certain players in the midfield can be effective. At the pro level, with enough time any style of play can be countered. For those who've really played in these types of environements its tougher than it looks on tv. The kids should be exposed to it, learn it, and learn how to practice to be better at it.

 

[Dale Earnhardt Jr Jr]

For a team to build out from the back game after game the entire team really has to have the skill, comfort, vision, patience, and IQ to play that way. That's difficult to do at the youth level even without a counter defense to it in a game.
You can also play more long balls instead, but that requires the same skill level, but it's executed differently where you have to have the skill to place that ball 25+yards exactly where it needs to be, and a forward or winger who can actually do something with the ball.

Even at the YNT level they struggle with playing out of the back, or even hitting precision the long balls.
The U16s just played Spain twice last week. They lost and tied and it was a poor showing for any style of play.
The build up from the back didnt' work well, and even at this level it exposes how the kids havent grasped the correct movement, correct passing texture, and the stress of playing in their own defensive 1/3rd.

At the youth level all styles of play can be countered by pressing the backline and the keeper, or isolating certain players in the midfield can be effective. At the pro level, with enough time any style of play can be countered. For those who've really played in these types of environements its tougher than it looks on tv. The kids should be exposed to it, learn it, and learn how to practice to be better at it.

This is precisely why I think, at the younger levels, build out should be emphasized because it will focus kids in on foot skill and off the ball movement. Those, IMO, are two of the biggest inhibitors to kids advancing in the sport. Even smaller kids who aren't as athletic or physical can survive in higher leagues if they have good technique and can move off the ball. Eventually, a lack of athleticism or size will catch up with them but they can play for a long time and play pleasing soccer with those two things emphasized in development. Longer aerial play can be introduced, but I definitely don't think it should be looked at as a lesser form of soccer (not pointing this out because you made that point, just that the contention is made a lot and I think it is much more nuanced than "long ball is for dullards".)

Good thread. Gives me hope for this site.

 

[watfly]

This is precisely why I think, at the younger levels, build out should be emphasized because it will focus kids in on foot skill and off the ball movement. Those, IMO, are two of the biggest inhibitors to kids advancing in the sport. Even smaller kids who aren't as athletic or physical can survive in higher leagues if they have good technique and can move off the ball. Eventually, a lack of athleticism or size will catch up with them but they can play for a long time and play pleasing soccer with those two things emphasized in development. Longer aerial play can be introduced, but I definitely don't think it should be looked at as a lesser form of soccer (not pointing this out because you made that point, just that the contention is made a lot and I think it is much more nuanced than "long ball is for dullards".)

Good thread. Gives me hope for this site.

Off the ball movement is not taught enough. Watch our national teams and see how little there is.

 

[Dale Earnhardt Jr Jr]

Off the ball movement is not taught enough. Watch our national teams and see how little there is.

Reminds me of the Xavi story and his marks at La Masia: low to average assessments in every category except positioning where he scored very high. Xavi leveraged that skill to legendary status because he developed an IQ for movement and space. When that opens up for a player, the entire field opens up. Yet here? It is an after thought of a skill (but emphasized extensively in basketball and hockey, so go figure?).

I appreciate all the good and great coaches my kids have had in the sport. But there are far too few of them.

 

[Paul Spacey]

Building from the back.
Playing direct.
Counter.
Short combination stuff.
Long balls.
Positional.
Relational.
And on…

ALL of it has value at the appropriate time. That’s the point.

Pep summed it up years ago, “We want to use all the weapons.”

 

[Orangeteam]

I dont want to over do the example, but if you're unfamiliar with it go look it up.
1998. de Boer's long ball to Bergkamp. If you showed kids this it would help frame how much practice and talent went into that one play.
The accuracy, timing, run, final touch and ability to remain calm after that touch, final shot. And don't forget, that ball came down in the shadow of the field. It just shows you that any style of play has to be practiced and practiced and understood what it means in context.
Frank, and others, hit balls like that in practice all the time... the accumlated hours of practice is what we see as spectators.
If i see kids play long balls that always fall into the pockets just right i they are spending time, and a lot of time on practicing that.

For the teams that the like the long ball. When was the last time you saw your coaches carving out time for the kids to hit 30-60 long balls a week and a running target. My assumption is never.

 

[Carlsbad7]

Building from the back.
Playing direct.
Counter.
Short combination stuff.
Long balls.
Positional.
Relational.
And on…

ALL of it has value at the appropriate time. That’s the point.

Pep summed it up years ago, “We want to use all the weapons.”

A player trained to play posession from a young age can switch to playing direct whenever they want.

A direct player that's never really played possession can only play direct.

This is why it's important to teach young players how to play out of the back. It's just another skill that will let you be better that others who never learned.

The best youth teams I've ever seen play switch from possession to direct depending on how the defenders play them.

 

[watfly]

I dont want to over do the example, but if you're unfamiliar with it go look it up.
1998. de Boer's long ball to Bergkamp. If you showed kids this it would help frame how much practice and talent went into that one play.
The accuracy, timing, run, final touch and ability to remain calm after that touch, final shot. And don't forget, that ball came down in the shadow of the field. It just shows you that any style of play has to be practiced and practiced and understood what it means in context.
Frank, and others, hit balls like that in practice all the time... the accumlated hours of practice is what we see as spectators.
If i see kids play long balls that always fall into the pockets just right i they are spending time, and a lot of time on practicing that.

For the teams that the like the long ball. When was the last time you saw your coaches carving out time for the kids to hit 30-60 long balls a week and a running target. My assumption is never.

There are many "high level" clubs whose training revolves primarily around the rondo, and variations thereof. Doesn't leave much room for training on longer passes. Rondo's are a great training tool, but I believe there is an over reliance by certain clubs.

 

[Dale Earnhardt Jr Jr]

I dont want to over do the example, but if you're unfamiliar with it go look it up.
1998. de Boer's long ball to Bergkamp. If you showed kids this it would help frame how much practice and talent went into that one play.
The accuracy, timing, run, final touch and ability to remain calm after that touch, final shot. And don't forget, that ball came down in the shadow of the field. It just shows you that any style of play has to be practiced and practiced and understood what it means in context.
Frank, and others, hit balls like that in practice all the time... the accumlated hours of practice is what we see as spectators.
If i see kids play long balls that always fall into the pockets just right i they are spending time, and a lot of time on practicing that.

For the teams that the like the long ball. When was the last time you saw your coaches carving out time for the kids to hit 30-60 long balls a week and a running target. My assumption is never.

One the greatest sequences of football I've ever seen live.

 

[Grace T.]

A player trained to play posession from a young age can switch to playing direct whenever they want.

A direct player that's never really played possession can only play direct.

This is why it's important to teach young players how to play out of the back. It's just another skill that will let you be better that others who never learned.

The best youth teams I've ever seen play switch from possession to direct depending on how the defenders play them.

Yes but again the limiting factor is the GK. Many teams on the boys side may not give them the goalkicks until U15. Even when you do it give to them, there's no training as to when they should switch long/short and how to make that judgment. The only time my son ever got any such training was when he was the alternate GK on the club's adult UPSL team.

There are many "high level" clubs whose training revolves primarily around the rondo, and variations thereof. Doesn't leave much room for training on longer passes. Rondo's are a great training tool, but I believe there is an over reliance by certain clubs.

Ooooff...this is my No. 1 pet peeve. So many coaches don't know how to train the rondo or are just lazy. They just do the big circle that gives players on a certain number of touches on the ball. There are so many better ones. The 4 man triangle is a much more excellent way to teach possession in close spaces. The 4v4 rectangle with GKS or backs on both ends is also fantastic. I personally love this one the Galaxy use with the center circle from Aiden Feuer's distribution highlights which teach GKs how to break the line. I want to scream every time I see a coach set up a big circle rondo with 1 ball.

I dont want to over do the example, but if you're unfamiliar with it go look it up.
1998. de Boer's long ball to Bergkamp. If you showed kids this it would help frame how much practice and talent went into that one play.
The accuracy, timing, run, final touch and ability to remain calm after that touch, final shot. And don't forget, that ball came down in the shadow of the field. It just shows you that any style of play has to be practiced and practiced and understood what it means in context.
Frank, and others, hit balls like that in practice all the time... the accumlated hours of practice is what we see as spectators.
If i see kids play long balls that always fall into the pockets just right i they are spending time, and a lot of time on practicing that.

For the teams that the like the long ball. When was the last time you saw your coaches carving out time for the kids to hit 30-60 long balls a week and a running target. My assumption is never.

This is again a GK limitation. Even when you hand the goalkicks over to big legged defenders they are often just kicking it with no rhyme nor reason. It takes quite a bit of practice, not to mention field space (how many teams have more than a 1/2 field) to work on. Technically the Gks need to be able to hit with precision which only happens at the higher levels around u16 for the boys. And even on the higher teams, there are tons of alternates that don't seem to be able to do it.

 

[crush]

My kid played kickball in her early youth career, and it was fun as hell to watch. Lots of action and very aggressive. All about speed and timing is everything and of course the lucky bounce in the wind. However, the passing game from the back was by far the best. Everyone gets involved, just like how the Hoosiers (RIP Gene) won a Natty. No punt from the GK when kids are young is how to play the game, MOO!