Ability plays little part in how we play the game - a lesson in football (TBC)

[Tooj]

I don't mind HTT, least he posts about something other than finances which is refreshing around this place.

 

I agree with that completely. I wouldn't just say it's like that around here though, pretty much any Newcastle board at the moment everyone seems to be more interested in the financial side rather than the footballing. I can't wait when we can put all of this behind us and actually focus on the footballing side of things again.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

I don't mind HTT, least he posts about something other than finances which is refreshing around this place.

 

Me neither, but the tone of this OP is a bit weird, not sure why we all need a 'lesson in football'!

[Neil]

I don't mind HTT, least he posts about something other than finances which is refreshing around this place.

 

Me neither, but the tone of this OP is a bit weird, not sure why we all need a 'lesson in football'!

 

Aye that's the bit that narks me as well.

[Shearergol]

Point 2, for discussion:

 

There is no such thing as talent [/fact]

[Guest Heneage]

Ok HTT I take your point into consideration, but to advise your nephew to do that in my opinion is lunacy. Expressing yourself is not dribbling in your own box. The best players are the ones who know when to be creative, your own box is no this situation. Of course working on your technique etc is important, but so is off the ball, you can have the technique of Van Basten but its wasted if you don't get away from your marker or make space for yourself to play.

 

Similarly its fine for you not to want to him be defined by a position but I also imagine that his physical nature, will define the type of positions he is better at as well as what are his better skills. In my trimmer days I had a good engine could pass and tackle so I played midfield for example.

 

He will not be a professional footballer so dribbling inside his own box will not have any impact on anything really, only his fun and freedom of expression so I encourage him to do just that, express himself. By the way those dribbles, 9 times out of 10 they take him down to the other end where he'll either score, set a team-mate up or run out of breath and gets tackled.

 

In general terms, telling a kid not to dribble inside his own box isn't helping that kid to understand football, just puts the fear factor/play it safe mentality into them which inhibits learning and expression (skills). Learn from your own mistakes. If you keep losing the ball by trying to dribble out of your own box you will eventually learn to clear it another way. Likewise if you keep taking the ball down to the other end you'll not just hack it clear. It isn't as if he does try to dribble it every single time anyway, because he plays football the way he sees it and learns from mistakes etc. he can decide perfectly well on his own what to do when he's on the ball.

 

You want to see him though, really skilful and a real joy to watch. Love watching him play. 10 years old, only been playing since he was 7. Scored 32 goals in his first season for his club (at the age of 7) and set up 20 or so more. Won player of the season and was being voted MOTM in every game by opposition coaches. Joined a new club last summer and scored 5 on his debut. Has had scouts watching and various clubs after him. Has lost interest now, he's all for his education (very bright kid, I was talking about the theory of relativity with him this afternoon and he actually explained it all to me! He wants to be a scientist). Still plays but isn't out there playing every day for hours on end. Part of me feels sad about that but he is never going to be a professional footballer in reality or a top one anyway so why dedicate your entire childhood right into your teens when you could put in those hours to schooling, that's the decision he's chosen anyway and good for him. Mind he's in his school team and they have a tournament in Manchester in a few weeks time and of course, goes to Toon games with me and we still have our kick-abouts.

 

Because of his ability I went all serious for a while in terms of coaching, done the badges, had him out coaching him, he doesn't need it, there is nowt I can teach him that the game can't or he himself can't learn nor does the game hold the level of appeal for him over education to justify such amazing dedication levels.

Yeah but even if its a kick about he's going to piss off his team mates if he's dicking about with it at the back, I don't care if he's the mini Messi there will be a time when someone tackles him and blasts it in.

[Disco]

Who's Nixons fatha like?

[Neil]

Who's Nixons fatha like?

 

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/41204000/jpg/_41204839_nixon_afp203.jpg

[Guest Howaythetoon]

 

Pretty scathing though to say someone's dad who has a lot of footballing-related experience "knows f*** all".

 

 

I know, pretty piss poor on my behalf and I apologise again. I'd like to apologise to Pilko too. Rich is right and from now on I'll refrain from biting, sick to death of arguing tbh over nothing.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Ok HTT I take your point into consideration, but to advise your nephew to do that in my opinion is lunacy. Expressing yourself is not dribbling in your own box. The best players are the ones who know when to be creative, your own box is no this situation. Of course working on your technique etc is important, but so is off the ball, you can have the technique of Van Basten but its wasted if you don't get away from your marker or make space for yourself to play.

 

Similarly its fine for you not to want to him be defined by a position but I also imagine that his physical nature, will define the type of positions he is better at as well as what are his better skills. In my trimmer days I had a good engine could pass and tackle so I played midfield for example.

 

He will not be a professional footballer so dribbling inside his own box will not have any impact on anything really, only his fun and freedom of expression so I encourage him to do just that, express himself. By the way those dribbles, 9 times out of 10 they take him down to the other end where he'll either score, set a team-mate up or run out of breath and gets tackled.

 

In general terms, telling a kid not to dribble inside his own box isn't helping that kid to understand football, just puts the fear factor/play it safe mentality into them which inhibits learning and expression (skills). Learn from your own mistakes. If you keep losing the ball by trying to dribble out of your own box you will eventually learn to clear it another way. Likewise if you keep taking the ball down to the other end you'll not just hack it clear. It isn't as if he does try to dribble it every single time anyway, because he plays football the way he sees it and learns from mistakes etc. he can decide perfectly well on his own what to do when he's on the ball.

 

You want to see him though, really skilful and a real joy to watch. Love watching him play. 10 years old, only been playing since he was 7. Scored 32 goals in his first season for his club (at the age of 7) and set up 20 or so more. Won player of the season and was being voted MOTM in every game by opposition coaches. Joined a new club last summer and scored 5 on his debut. Has had scouts watching and various clubs after him. Has lost interest now, he's all for his education (very bright kid, I was talking about the theory of relativity with him this afternoon and he actually explained it all to me! He wants to be a scientist). Still plays but isn't out there playing every day for hours on end. Part of me feels sad about that but he is never going to be a professional footballer in reality or a top one anyway so why dedicate your entire childhood right into your teens when you could put in those hours to schooling, that's the decision he's chosen anyway and good for him. Mind he's in his school team and they have a tournament in Manchester in a few weeks time and of course, goes to Toon games with me and we still have our kick-abouts.

 

Because of his ability I went all serious for a while in terms of coaching, done the badges, had him out coaching him, he doesn't need it, there is nowt I can teach him that the game can't or he himself can't learn nor does the game hold the level of appeal for him over education to justify such amazing dedication levels.

Yeah but even if its a kick about he's going to piss off his team mates if he's dicking about with it at the back, I don't care if he's the mini Messi there will be a time when someone tackles him and blasts it in.

 

If anything it encourages his team-mates to be as expressive, whether inside their own box or not. It only pisses off the adults who for some reason think all of this - kids football - is important. Ask any kid why they play and they'll say "because its fun"

[Segun Oluwaniyi]

When I was 10 I know me and most of the people I knew took football pretty serious. We used to have big long matches after our classes were over and I know that if some lunatic was costing us by trying to be Pele infront our goal we'd have words with him. You don't always have to play serious football though. The most skillful players develop by just spending hours on end messing around with their friends. Expressing themselves however they please. This should not be done in a competitive setting though.

[Guest Heneage]

Ok HTT I take your point into consideration, but to advise your nephew to do that in my opinion is lunacy. Expressing yourself is not dribbling in your own box. The best players are the ones who know when to be creative, your own box is no this situation. Of course working on your technique etc is important, but so is off the ball, you can have the technique of Van Basten but its wasted if you don't get away from your marker or make space for yourself to play.

 

Similarly its fine for you not to want to him be defined by a position but I also imagine that his physical nature, will define the type of positions he is better at as well as what are his better skills. In my trimmer days I had a good engine could pass and tackle so I played midfield for example.

 

He will not be a professional footballer so dribbling inside his own box will not have any impact on anything really, only his fun and freedom of expression so I encourage him to do just that, express himself. By the way those dribbles, 9 times out of 10 they take him down to the other end where he'll either score, set a team-mate up or run out of breath and gets tackled.

 

In general terms, telling a kid not to dribble inside his own box isn't helping that kid to understand football, just puts the fear factor/play it safe mentality into them which inhibits learning and expression (skills). Learn from your own mistakes. If you keep losing the ball by trying to dribble out of your own box you will eventually learn to clear it another way. Likewise if you keep taking the ball down to the other end you'll not just hack it clear. It isn't as if he does try to dribble it every single time anyway, because he plays football the way he sees it and learns from mistakes etc. he can decide perfectly well on his own what to do when he's on the ball.

 

You want to see him though, really skilful and a real joy to watch. Love watching him play. 10 years old, only been playing since he was 7. Scored 32 goals in his first season for his club (at the age of 7) and set up 20 or so more. Won player of the season and was being voted MOTM in every game by opposition coaches. Joined a new club last summer and scored 5 on his debut. Has had scouts watching and various clubs after him. Has lost interest now, he's all for his education (very bright kid, I was talking about the theory of relativity with him this afternoon and he actually explained it all to me! He wants to be a scientist). Still plays but isn't out there playing every day for hours on end. Part of me feels sad about that but he is never going to be a professional footballer in reality or a top one anyway so why dedicate your entire childhood right into your teens when you could put in those hours to schooling, that's the decision he's chosen anyway and good for him. Mind he's in his school team and they have a tournament in Manchester in a few weeks time and of course, goes to Toon games with me and we still have our kick-abouts.

 

Because of his ability I went all serious for a while in terms of coaching, done the badges, had him out coaching him, he doesn't need it, there is nowt I can teach him that the game can't or he himself can't learn nor does the game hold the level of appeal for him over education to justify such amazing dedication levels.

Yeah but even if its a kick about he's going to piss off his team mates if he's dicking about with it at the back, I don't care if he's the mini Messi there will be a time when someone tackles him and blasts it in.

 

If anything it encourages his team-mates to be as expressive, whether inside their own box or not. It only pisses off the adults who for some reason think all of this - kids football - is important. Ask any kid why they play and they'll say "because its fun"

 

I don't argue "Because it's fun" but the first team I joined was when I first moved to Durham was really piss poor, the first 5-6 games we got spanked 8-9 10 goals per match. Bottom of the league, I got moved from right back to up front to centre midfield, I got like 5 of the 12 goals we got the season. And to be honest I hated every minute of it after a while. We had a coach who was all "Go out enjoy yourself play how you feel." Now some of the players were poor technically, but some who were "Ok" but they would mess around at the back shoot from distance.

 

For some players like myself, the fun is in winning, my Dad never told me "You have to win you have to be the best" he just said "Go play your game and you'll do well." My brother is the same, he plays in a team of good players but some shoot from 40 yards out for no apparent reason, other than there ill-advised parents who spend £80 on boots and tell their kids to "Express themselves play how you want to play".

 

Now for all those who don't have fun because its too competitive, you have players like my brother who comes away sometimes seriously frustrated, because he will set up a team mate and I've seen him do it, then when the roles are reversed he will expect the same pass just for the kid to blast it wide or over.

[buzza]

I think that "structure" should be brought into kids football at a later stage (10+), we suffocate them by implementing rigid platforms in which they are expected to hold their positions and have tactical awareness.

I am all for "having fun" and for children to express themselves, if they make mistakes they will learn more that way...

P.S. I detest the sideline brigade who scream and shout at football games with youngsters playing especially the so called coaches!

[Guest Howaythetoon]

I don't argue "Because it's fun" but the first team I joined was when I first moved to Durham was really piss poor, the first 5-6 games we got spanked 8-9 10 goals per match. Bottom of the league, I got moved from right back to up front to centre midfield, I got like 5 of the 12 goals we got the season. And to be honest I hated every minute of it after a while. We had a coach who was all "Go out enjoy yourself play how you feel." Now some of the players were poor technically, but some who were "Ok" but they would mess around at the back shoot from distance.

 

For some players like myself, the fun is in winning, my Dad never told me "You have to win you have to be the best" he just said "Go play your game and you'll do well." My brother is the same, he plays in a team of good players but some shoot from 40 yards out for no apparent reason, other than there ill-advised parents who spend £80 on boots and tell their kids to "Express themselves play how you want to play".

 

Now for all those who don't have fun because its too competitive, you have players like my brother who comes away sometimes seriously frustrated, because he will set up a team mate and I've seen him do it, then when the roles are reversed he will expect the same pass just for the kid to blast it wide or over.

 

Kids are naturally competitive and badly want to win whatever the competition, be it a kick-about on a muddy school field at break-time or a 7-a-side game at under 9 level for their youth team. What adults have done and the game in this country for kids has created is a winning mentality among kids where they will beat themselves up after a game has long finished because their team lost or because they failed to score a goal. And this is because we've attached an extra importance to what is effectively their fun time and that is not only wrong but it also inhibits expression which as we all know leads to flair and skills.

 

As for kids shooting from 40 yards with their parents telling them to go and express themselves, that's the whole point and we as adults have no fucking right whatsoever to try and play their game for them on the touchlines, no right at all.

 

Ask any kid what they would rather have, 3 points for their team, or a hat-trick and they'll say both. That's because kids are selfish, in a good way, but ask them to choose just one and most will say 3 goals thankyou very much. That's why they play football, to express themselves, not to be stuck in a position chosen by an adult and told to play as one, "push up", "play it safe", "get back", "get stuck in", "don't dribble there man" - me if I were a kid would stick to fingers up to all that and play how I want to play and do what I want to do when that ball is at my feet.

 

Many think that will lead to greedy kids who won't pass the ball but kids are brilliant at creating and sticking by their own rules. If a kid keeps hogging the ball ignoring others' shouts of "pass" he'll not get a pass back when another is on the ball so in time will learn to pass the ball and will know that if you want to be part of a team, you have to play your part.

 

The game of football wouldn't have evolved if this wasn't the case.

 

When I was a kid we picked sides based on everyone getting a number and going away in a circle where the picker would call out numbers, if he called your number out, you were on his team. At kick off everyone would lineup all over the place, but as the game wore on we'd learn that we can't just play anywhere or not do this or that, so some kids would stay back, some would stick to midfield, some would play up front and eventually hey, we were playing 4-4-2 or 3-5-2 or whatever. Kids don't need adults to tell them how to play the game.

 

When that does happen they can never ever be the player their mind can allow them to be, they will always be some adult creation, this is why we struggle to produce flair players because all that individualism and freedom of expression gets knocked out of them. We also struggle to produce players truly comfortable on the ball and in all areas of the pitch and this is because most kids only get to play one or two roles, usually based on their physical characteristics. I was always picked to play at CB at school due to my height, even though I was quick as fook. And I hated it.

 

Every single weekend all over the country many kids go home in tears because in the pathetic way the game is for them these days, there can only ever be 7 to 11 players on the pitch at the same time and even when there is no restrictions on the number of subs allowed, some coaches because they are too bothered about winning, will not put a kid on or give a kid more than a few minutes.

 

Youth football in this country stinks and needs abolished in its ultra competitive anti development structured form that it exists in. No wonder England are shite and half our academy sides are filled with foreigners and that 1 in every 2 kids that play the game, drop out of it within a few years of taking it up.

 

These kids are not just important in terms of talent but fans too because if the game pisses them off when they are kids, they'll not want to follow it as adults as its when you're a kid you truly fall in love with the game and its that love that makes you want to play it and watch it and support your team.

[Pilko]

HTT - this isn't me being critical, so read this...

 

The concept of picking numbers to determine teams is quite common and still used nowadays (I know thats how my 11-year old brother chooses teams up at the field) and it was used sometimes when I was at school. There wasn't a "formation" as you said but there were kids who defended, kids who went in net, kids who goal poached, kids who just followed the ball everywhere and kids who just wanted to try out that trick they saw Henry do on MOTD. Your about 85% right about the coaching thing, it does pretty much stink, personally I think a child under 10 should be played by a coach as a "keeper", "defender", "midfielder" or "striker", none of this left back, right back, attacking mid etc. They should be encouraged to use the space out wide and told/shown how it can pay off etc but not rigidly made to hug the touchline. They should get to have a go at every position (keeper optional) and decide where they enjoy playing or where they play best.

 

After that age of 10, the coach should start assessing where he thinks kids are best suited to play, and sort of having a chat with them and asking. Obviously a lot of kids will say "striker!" but the coach should still say "I don't think you'd be at your best as a striker, you need to have really really good finishing/heading whatever, and if you played midfield you'd be able to use your good pass and tackle as well as having some shots when you can." or things to that effect, and in my opinion, if a kid is told to play in defence but then has a few good games and is praised by the coach, they'll grow to the idea of playing there.

 

When I was playing for the school team in middle school, the first eight weeks or so was when I was on the bench and I only got on the pitch something like three times, for about 10 minutes at the end. I went to the teacher in training the next week and asked him if I could play more, and he said "Yes, if you keep it up in training you'll get more games." - Although I was benched again that week, I played the whole second half. I went to him and had a similar conversation the next week and he said he was pleased how bothered I was about not playing. After that started every game bar two (one I missed through illness, the other was the last game of the season and I was dropped to the bench) and sort of developed a consistency of playing at centre midfield. Through that, not only did I gain skills of how to mark other kids and learn to pass quicker, I also got the mental part right of not giving up and hassling the manager to play and trying to prove I was good enough.

 

Many a manager has picked me as a CB in the past also, as you said HTT, because of my height. The problem is, I was never a good enough reader of the game, or good enough at holding a defensive line/position to be any good there. I was always drifting about or playing people onside. Striker is where I'm better at holding a line, retaining the ball and trying to find a pass. There's also less chance that an error will lead to a goal, and as my passing isn't exactly great, it would be a disaster if I played at CB.

 

Kids need to enjoy football, but also be coached and given some form of discipline, getting slightly firmer at every youth level.

 

They also need to be aware that if they are very unhappy with where they are playing or that they aren't enjoying it, that they must speak to the coach politely and try and rectify the problem. Coaches need to make that more plain.

[Rich]

 

This thread is the only fucker worth reading now people are being civil to each other. Studying coaching at university at the minute means I've got a massive interest in other people's experiences of coaching and ideas of what coaching should be as I believe one of the main ways I can improve personally is by taking on other ideas and suggestions from all-comers. Everyone who has had experience of competitive football at any level (or even those that haven't in some cases) have a lot to offer and are a valuable resource in this instance.

 

When it comes to doing my dissertation on the social, psychological and political aspects of football coaching I might well be tapping a few up off here for interviews if I can't get my name to a professional club!

 

Have loads to add from my own POV but it's late and I've got "proper" dissertation research to do, but I'll do my best to get involved in this over the weekend.

 

Loving it, though, if that wasn't obvious enough.

[TRon]

This might be a lesson in football at a minor level but how does it equate with NUFC as a professional outfit?

 

HTT bigs up local favourites like Steve Taylor and dumps on the likes of Coloccini and Jonas, so his judgement is flawed IMO.

[Guest Heneage]

HTT - this isn't me being critical, so read this...

 

The concept of picking numbers to determine teams is quite common and still used nowadays (I know thats how my 11-year old brother chooses teams up at the field) and it was used sometimes when I was at school. There wasn't a "formation" as you said but there were kids who defended, kids who went in net, kids who goal poached, kids who just followed the ball everywhere and kids who just wanted to try out that trick they saw Henry do on MOTD. Your about 85% right about the coaching thing, it does pretty much stink, personally I think a child under 10 should be played by a coach as a "keeper", "defender", "midfielder" or "striker", none of this left back, right back, attacking mid etc. They should be encouraged to use the space out wide and told/shown how it can pay off etc but not rigidly made to hug the touchline. They should get to have a go at every position (keeper optional) and decide where they enjoy playing or where they play best.

 

After that age of 10, the coach should start assessing where he thinks kids are best suited to play, and sort of having a chat with them and asking. Obviously a lot of kids will say "striker!" but the coach should still say "I don't think you'd be at your best as a striker, you need to have really really good finishing/heading whatever, and if you played midfield you'd be able to use your good pass and tackle as well as having some shots when you can." or things to that effect, and in my opinion, if a kid is told to play in defence but then has a few good games and is praised by the coach, they'll grow to the idea of playing there.

 

When I was playing for the school team in middle school, the first eight weeks or so was when I was on the bench and I only got on the pitch something like three times, for about 10 minutes at the end. I went to the teacher in training the next week and asked him if I could play more, and he said "Yes, if you keep it up in training you'll get more games." - Although I was benched again that week, I played the whole second half. I went to him and had a similar conversation the next week and he said he was pleased how bothered I was about not playing. After that started every game bar two (one I missed through illness, the other was the last game of the season and I was dropped to the bench) and sort of developed a consistency of playing at centre midfield. Through that, not only did I gain skills of how to mark other kids and learn to pass quicker, I also got the mental part right of not giving up and hassling the manager to play and trying to prove I was good enough.

 

Many a manager has picked me as a CB in the past also, as you said HTT, because of my height. The problem is, I was never a good enough reader of the game, or good enough at holding a defensive line/position to be any good there. I was always drifting about or playing people onside. Striker is where I'm better at holding a line, retaining the ball and trying to find a pass. There's also less chance that an error will lead to a goal, and as my passing isn't exactly great, it would be a disaster if I played at CB.

 

Kids need to enjoy football, but also be coached and given some form of discipline, getting slightly firmer at every youth level.

 

They also need to be aware that if they are very unhappy with where they are playing or that they aren't enjoying it, that they must speak to the coach politely and try and rectify the problem. Coaches need to make that more plain.

 

Exactly.

 

It would be great to just put 11 kids out and say "Enjoy" but some kids need structure. I bet Pilko hated playing Centre back as he probably rarely had a good game. I'm not saying you have to tell a lad he's only good at left wing because he's fast and that is the only position he will play. But some sort of structure is required, I was ok at centre back but my lack of height was a problem, I could read the game fine and a striker running at me was no problem, but I'd get beat in the air and sometimes be a bit to relaxed at the back.

 

My brother had the same problem, he's a brilliant passer of the ball, a bit nippy but used to be very lightweight, his coach would play him on the wing or in the middle where bigger tougher lads would be more physical. I went to one game were his team were losing he came on at half time and they were winning 2-1 inside of 10 minutes. I kid you not a midfielder was took aside something was whispered, and every-time he got he ball then on, he was not tackled, he was assaulted by this lad who was just under 5'11 and built quite heavy for his age. A tougher midfielder could have dealt with better, and to his credit my brother did solider on scoring the 3rd before he was taken off because he was just getting hacked to bits. I am not ashamed to admit that I gave their coach a right blasting after the game, because he had attempted to seriously injure a young lad just because he was playing well. Now by the same accord his manager could have played off the striker where you see less physical action but can still dictate play and set up goals.

 

His current side have a similar problem, the coach's son obviously wants to play Centre back, so he does, but in no way is he built like a centre back or have the head on him to play it, he is barged about doesn't like getting physical, and is really a tailor made winger because he is tricky and quick.

 

Tbh I have a lot of good memories of Sunday League, I played with a team for a few years and had a lot of fun. But in the end the coach I had made me quit. I take Pilko's point about caring but I found out it didn't make much difference.I was never a whippet but had decent pace on me, yet in the final season with a new manager found myself benched for his son, who bar taking a good corner did very little and demanded to play centre, up until that point I'd had a good relationship with our striker who was quick and liked the ball played along side him so he could shoot, he hated the aerial game.

 

After a while of getting 10 minutes here 10 minutes there. I confronted the coach, I said "Please can I start a game just to show you what I can do" I had scored 2 of the last 3 weeks coming off the bench both times we were down by a few goals so it made little difference. He agreed and chuffed I started a cup game away to a side below us a division, they took the lead and I got annoyed. I was never captain but along with the captain I attempted to motivate the lads and we won 3-1 in the end, me getting the 3rd from the penalty spot.

 

I thought brilliant I played well scored one set up one. I really though I have to start next week, but come Sunday I was dropped. About a fortnight after as this was late in the season I was asked would I be staying on next year and without hesitation I said no, it got slightly worse after that as I played less and in my last game missed a sitter that would of in effect won us the game.

 

I think for all the coaches that listen, for some players it can be frustrating, as when the coaches son is involved it often spells trouble, no Dad wants to drop his son.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

This might be a lesson in football at a minor level but how does it equate with NUFC as a professional outfit?

 

HTT bigs up local favourites like Steve Taylor and dumps on the likes of Coloccini and Jonas, so his judgement is flawed IMO.

 

I haven't bigged up Taylor and dumped on Colo and Jonas. I have identified their flaws as I see them and make judgements on those (and every player) using that basis. With Taylor I will admit I will factor in his cost (nothing), his age (young) and his experience or calibre (nothing special) but then I do that with Colo and Jonas too. I expect more from those 2 than Taylor as they are internationals who have played for some very good clubs and experienced the very top levels of football, that and of course their education.

 

I regard Taylor as an average footballer but someone who still has the potential to be a decent defender, more so at right back where certainly this season, he has played rather well I think. I regard Colo based on what I've seen as a bit of a flop but recognise he is a good footballer and he will hopefully show that on a consistent basis for us pretty soon. I regard Jonas as an extremely gifted footballer, a very good one, whose ability is let down by average technique. The latter two are without doubt "better" than Taylor.

 

Back to Taylor, I want him to succeed here not because he's a Geordie or because I like him or even rate him, but because a product of the youth system achieving success would give the youth system much hope and indeed say to younger players you can make it at your local club, which is something that isn't the case and hasn't been for a long time. You could say that's me favouring him.

 

Jonas and Colo I want to succeed too, obviously, but were they to not succeed, I wouldn't be as disappointed as I am when a youth product does.

 

My judgement is pretty spot on when I don't allow emotion get in the way which I won't lie isn't all too often, not where Newcastle is concerned anyway. Believe it or not I've studied a great deal of sport psychology (not academically), science and theory and to my mind, ability alone is never ever enough and not even ability plus is going to guarantee a player will succeed or a manager even. There are too many variables and conditions and this thread is my way of working through them not just for my own understanding but to generate a discussion around these variables and conditions which thankfully, has kind of happened with Nixon and Pilko making some great points above for example.

[Mowen]

I think for all the coaches that listen, for some players it can be frustrating, as when the coaches son is involved it often spells trouble, no Dad wants to drop his son.

 

And can you blame them? The main reason people get involved in coaching in my experience is to spend more time with a relative (even HTT says this is why he did it at first) and once you've done that it's a difficult relationship to manage. It isn't how they should go about it, but I reckon if someone's taking the time to put the hours in you can't really begrudge them picking their kid.

 

Brilliantly satirised by the simpsons, of course.

[Pilko]

I think for all the coaches that listen, for some players it can be frustrating, as when the coaches son is involved it often spells trouble, no Dad wants to drop his son.

 

And can you blame them? The main reason people get involved in coaching in my experience is to spend more time with a relative (even HTT says this is why he did it at first) and once you've done that it's a difficult relationship to manage. It isn't how they should go about it, but I reckon if someone's taking the time to put the hours in you can't really begrudge them picking their kid.

 

Brilliantly satirised by the simpsons, of course.

 

--Springfield 0 Victory City 86--

 

"Great debut son! You really settled in after some early jitters!"

 

[Mowen]

Nelson - how's your arm feeling?

 

Great!

 

Excellent, take this forfeit note to the umpire, we can't play without Bart!

 

Slightly paraphrased (made up) but a fucking brilliant episode.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

HTT - this isn't me being critical, so read this...

 

The concept of picking numbers to determine teams is quite common and still used nowadays (I know thats how my 11-year old brother chooses teams up at the field) and it was used sometimes when I was at school. There wasn't a "formation" as you said but there were kids who defended, kids who went in net, kids who goal poached, kids who just followed the ball everywhere and kids who just wanted to try out that trick they saw Henry do on MOTD. Your about 85% right about the coaching thing, it does pretty much stink, personally I think a child under 10 should be played by a coach as a "keeper", "defender", "midfielder" or "striker", none of this left back, right back, attacking mid etc. They should be encouraged to use the space out wide and told/shown how it can pay off etc but not rigidly made to hug the touchline. They should get to have a go at every position (keeper optional) and decide where they enjoy playing or where they play best.

 

Couldn't agree more. Less teaching or commands, more encouragement. By the way my analogy of kids learning the "rules" of their own accord wasn't the best but the point still stands that kids will effectively learn from their mistakes, either intuitively, inadvertantly or through the assistance of fellow kids or in the case of my analogy, team-mates.

 

After that age of 10, the coach should start assessing where he thinks kids are best suited to play, and sort of having a chat with them and asking. Obviously a lot of kids will say "striker!" but the coach should still say "I don't think you'd be at your best as a striker, you need to have really really good finishing/heading whatever, and if you played midfield you'd be able to use your good pass and tackle as well as having some shots when you can." or things to that effect, and in my opinion, if a kid is told to play in defence but then has a few good games and is praised by the coach, they'll grow to the idea of playing there.

 

I disagree about the age, for me 13 is a more ideal age, but again I agree with your sentiments. At that age guidance is critical more than full on coaching. Kids' agility and reflexes start slowing down at the age of 10 (could be 8 even, can't remember) so in terms of technical development, skills and ability, if they don't already have some degree of it, it is extremely challenging to try and develop such things in teens, least of all because their body is changing and so too their mind, hence why encouragement, advice and what I call mental coaching is better suited. An ideal age to start planting ideas about positioning, tactics etc.

 

When I was playing for the school team in middle school, the first eight weeks or so was when I was on the bench and I only got on the pitch something like three times, for about 10 minutes at the end. I went to the teacher in training the next week and asked him if I could play more, and he said "Yes, if you keep it up in training you'll get more games." - Although I was benched again that week, I played the whole second half. I went to him and had a similar conversation the next week and he said he was pleased how bothered I was about not playing. After that started every game bar two (one I missed through illness, the other was the last game of the season and I was dropped to the bench) and sort of developed a consistency of playing at centre midfield. Through that, not only did I gain skills of how to mark other kids and learn to pass quicker, I also got the mental part right of not giving up and hassling the manager to play and trying to prove I was good enough.

 

Sounds like you had a very good teacher. When I told mine I wasn't happy playing at CB, he said there were better players than me in other areas so it was CB or the bench. I took the 3rd option - leaving.

 

Many a manager has picked me as a CB in the past also, as you said HTT, because of my height. The problem is, I was never a good enough reader of the game, or good enough at holding a defensive line/position to be any good there. I was always drifting about or playing people onside. Striker is where I'm better at holding a line, retaining the ball and trying to find a pass. There's also less chance that an error will lead to a goal, and as my passing isn't exactly great, it would be a disaster if I played at CB.

 

I read the game well but I'm useless in the air and at positioning. I like to roam. I had terrific energy levels and like I said was very quick, still am off the mark but tabs kill me over distance 

 

Kids need to enjoy football, but also be coached and given some form of discipline, getting slightly firmer at every youth level.

 

I have major issues with this and I'll explain why in a separate post.

 

They also need to be aware that if they are very unhappy with where they are playing or that they aren't enjoying it, that they must speak to the coach politely and try and rectify the problem. Coaches need to make that more plain.

 

Agreed but even your better or fairer coaches get sucked into what is best for the team or result and not always the kid stuck on the bench or who only ever gets a few minutes here and there. The rules need to change or need to be applied strictly. Some clubs have a policy that all kids have to play. Most don't. It is entirely down to the coach's discretion. All kids should get to play. The fairer coaches have rosters and try to give each kid an equal time on the pitch, if not possible in one game, over the course of a season.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Studying coaching at university at the minute

 

Sounds really interesting Rich, something that would appeal to me if I had more spare time. What are you hoping to do when you finish in terms of the game Rich? From my own perspective I found studying coaching, psychology, fitness and other sport related things (none academic, just out of curiosity and a hunger to learn) far more revealing that actually carrying out coaching which I've experienced 1 to 1, in groups and within a club structure. As a result I no longer want to coach. I'd rather facilitate and watch or study kids' football in an effort to try and improve their environment and game rather than them as would be footballers.

 

I used to do a few open sessions locally, basically me and street wardens putting on games for kids, which we either watched or joined in. Kids from 6 to 16 (boys and girls) would come along, great fun, everyone got lots of touches, scored a goal or even a few, learned something new without any coaching or instruction and many types of the game were played, singles and doubles, sides, headers and volleys - pure street football in a safe environment. When I just used to watch, it always amazed me how controlled everything was. The older kids would you'd think try and do it all but they didn't, they'd pass the ball to the younger ones and set them up for goals, the younger ones would reciprocate this. Never any arguments or even goal mooching.

 

Anyway, as a result I firmly believe that is all kids need, a safe environment. They don't need coaching at all. Not those who just want to play it for fun, regardless of age or sex. Even those who obviously have talent and take their football ultra serious need to experience free football in a street culture setting, i.e. with no adults or adult ideas.

 

If I had a lot of money and a lot of free time I'd open up a youth club for kids who want to play football in a safe environment away from the overbearing rule of adult involvement.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Kids need to enjoy football, but also be coached and given some form of discipline, getting slightly firmer at every youth level.

 

It would be great to just put 11 kids out and say "Enjoy" but some kids need structure.

 

I always ask coaches (and parents) who are of the opinion that all kids interested in football need coaching the same question: When your kid decides to get out some paper and pens during his/her play-time, do you whisk that kid away to an elaborate art school and watch from the sidelines as someone tries to teach your kid how to draw or paint, going through all the different genres and techniques, before they can draw or paint, while you stand by on the sidelines shouting "use red" or "that's not a painting"? The answer is always the same - "no, that would be silly."

 

So is the notion that all kids need coaching or structure and it is sheer arrogance and total misunderstanding on our behalf to assume these structures and coaching are the best way forward. Yes if those kids are in an academy or on the road to becoming a professional footballer one day but 99.99% of kids who play football do not fall into this category and never will with or without the assistance of an elaborate football system or a coach.

 

So why then do we feel the need to "help" a child at football and that our "way" is best?

 

Ever heard your mother or father say "because I said so"?

 

In other words Mum knows best.

 

Me, I always questioned my mother or father on all kinds of subjects and advise all kids to ask questions and to seek the truth. When I was little I would ask my mother who made the earth and she would in her ignorance say "why God". Sorry but that was not a satisfactory answer dear mother to my inquisitive, curious and thankfully then undeveloped mind. Now as an adult I understand why my mother give me such an answer because when she asked the very same question as I did, that's what her mother or father or teacher told her. I later found out that she didn't really believe that herself but never questioned it because she give little thought to the idea. I did and I'd like to think that because in other aspects of my childhood I was rather free to play, be it on my own or with friends, be it with toys or pens and paper or in an imaginary world that didn't exist outside my own head.

 

What has all this got to do with football you may be asking.

 

Well, for me it isn't even a question of football really, but play and the undeveloped minds of kids in that critical area of childhood that is the main question here.

 

Our "ways" and our we "know best" ideologies conflict directly with the curiosities of the undeveloped mind when put to play.

 

And while our ways and what we know as best is essential to kids in many ways, from the dangers or the roads to many other things, I really do feel and research and study is proving this, that our adult involvement and adult rule over our kids' imaginations at times of play is having a negative effect on their childhood, especially creativity and self confidence. Just look all around you. Imagination-land has been replaced by cyber-land. Jumpers for goal posts have been replaced by BS/CEN or PAS marks. Street football has been replaced by a mini version of the professional game.

 

Back to the drawing and painting analogy. For me the game of football in the eyes of a child is a blank piece of paper, their feet the crayons and their mind the artistry that follows when pen is put to paper. Cast your mind back to your first drawings or maybe take a look at drawings from your own child or nice or nephew, I have several from my own up on my wall and I can say they do not represent anything that I can safely say is this or that because most are just squiggles. I only know for example what they are because I've been told this one is a house, this one a cat or a dog and this one a person. To me I couldn't care what they are meant to represent or express however, they are beautiful all the same.

 

Kids do not see nor share our adult concepts of football, not unless we force them onto them and drill them into their (blank) minds. When we do this we put blocks on the most wondrous thing kids possess - their curiosity or imagination. We stifle it and when we do that in football we impede the natural development of all the aspects of the game we hold dear to our hearts. Flair, skills, creativity etc.

 

Ask a Newcastle United supporter what they would rather have - their number nine bagging a hat-trick or their team picking up 3 points. I'll answer the question myself. 3 points, always.

 

Ask a kid the same question but replace NUFC with their team or club which they play for and the number nine with themselves and they will say both. And that's because they do not see the question as a one or the other type question, they inherently believe (or wonder) that nothing is impossible (they are not cycnics you see) so they naturally say "both". Ask them to choose though.... and their default selfishness (this is not a negative) will 9 times out of 10 choose "3 goals for me" on their behalf.

 

But winning its err....

 

What?

 

Whether kids understand the concepts of winning and what winning means (which in kids' football let me remind you is nothing tangible in the material world) or not, on a subconscious level they don't really care. For kids their play-time (or a kick-about) is all about self satisfaction, self expression, and self exploration first and foremost. Winning is a mere bonus. These are innate characteristics in kids by the way and indeed a lot of adults (heard the phrase "never grew up", "like a big kid"? If this is often directed at you I salute you sir!).

 

Go and watch your kid play on FIFA, I guarantee there will be little passing of the ball between players or messing about with tactics, and line-ups etc. They go straight to the game and from kick off try and get the ball to either their favourite player or the fastest player and they will proceed to try and take on the entire opposition and shoot from anywhere. They're not bothered about the team they've selected winning, they just want to score goals and take on the world.

 

Ever played singles as a kid? We used to play it constantly and nearly all of us who played it consciously delayed the scoring of a goal or goals to advance through the rounds and we did this because scoring early meant you had to leave the game and wait for the next round which meant being unable to express ourselves, out-skill our opponent and yes, show off.

 

That's what kids want to do with a ball at their feet, essentially show off.

 

Without adult intervention, every kid that takes to a football pitch will set out to show off instead of setting out to win (by hook or crook which in adult terms means tactics, roles and instruction) a meaningless football match that matters more to the adults on the sideline than the kid with the ball at his or her feet who doesn't see a team-mate, hear an instruction etc. but an opportunity to show-off.

 

Our ways and our we know best curtails that natural instinct massively. By imposing our ways and what we believe or think to be the best on and into the blank canvases of our kids' minds, be it in football or drawing and painting, we are shaping ideas and concepts for them, pre-conceived ideas and concepts, and restricting the natural learning process to boot.

 

Kids do not need an adult to tell them to pass the ball, to shoot, to defend, to get back, to support.

 

The game itself will teach them that. This is a natural learning process.

 

By telling a kid or instructing a kid HOW to pass, shoot, defend etc. we are preventing them from developing their own unique to them ways of passing a ball, shooting etc. and just as importantly, developing OTHER ways.

 

If you listen to any old coach or read any old coaching manual they will reveal to you only a few examples of shooting, usually via "laces" or the side of the foot. In reality there are hundreds of techniques as there are in all aspects of the game from control to touch to heading and so on.

 

By telling or instructing a kid where to play and how to play we are preventing them from developing their own ideas and concepts of different roles, positions and ways in which to play the game.

 

There are right-backs and full-backs, there are centre-backs and sweepers, there are attacking midfielders and defensive midfielders, there are wingers and wide players, there are centre-forwards and forwards, there are playmakers and anchor players. To play these roles and positionally requires a great deal intuition and instinct which in part can never be taught or coached, they are predominantly developed from within by experience and challenges thrown out by the game itself. As Arsene Wenger says, the game really is the best teacher.

 

To play football one needs a ball or something that resembles a ball (a tennis ball perhaps or an orange? Those and other none footballs have been used from England to Brazil throughout time), a love affair with the game (i.e. a desire to play it), a convenient place to play it (be it the backyard, a proper football pitch, a field or the streets) and while others are preferable, they are not essential and lastly but all importantly an imagination.

 

To play football kids do not need a marked out pitch conforming to FA Rules, goals conforming to FA rules, a referee, a linesman two teams, a captain, a coach, spectators, a formation, tactics etc. The adult or professional game does but not kids' football.

 

In short football can be played using on orange in the backyard on one's own with the imagination creating the setting.

 

When I was a kid we played headers and volleys, singles and doubles, gates, full on sides, world-cup and all manner of games that didn't conform to the adult game. Ask a kid what gates are today and they'll answer those things that are at the end of a garden or lead to a garden.

 

I have introduced many forms of the game I used to play as a kid to my own nephew and his friends and they actually prefer these games to the real thing because they don't need an even number of people or a referee or a marked out pitch which are hard to find outside of a youth club or a monstrously caged pen councils build to keep pesky kids from doing what their signs tell them not to do. "NO BALL GAMES"

 

Structured football for kids in this country is for me a form of child abuse.

 

Trials for example.

 

Mini-League Soccer as the Americans would call it is essentially a talent competition with winners and losers. Where the participants are rated by judges (the coaches) after a series of adult designed tests and challenges using inconclusive methods and apparatus such as dribbling around a set of cones. The cone. Aye, because a football pitch is littered with cones in which the man on the ball has to navigate through. And they wonder why we can't seem to produce dribblers any more. Remove the cones you fools!

 

You do not need cones to learn to dribble. All you need is a ball at your feet and an objective and not an adult one either. When a kid is on the ball in a game he or she will do several things - dribbling being one of them - instinctively as is dictated by the game. The only way to master dribbling is by taking players on, not cones which are inanimate, do not react and most certainly does not get you anywhere. Cones... I'd have them flattened or coaches who use them for dribbling squashed inside them. Dribble your way out of that coach.

 

Anyway, for me kids most certainly do not need coached nor a structured environment to play football.

 

We assume every kid not only wants to be a footballer but with our help we can actually help them on the way (I was guilty of that myself regarding my own nephew). The reality is even if every kid did want to be a footballer, 99.99 percent of them stand no chance with or without the assistance of adults so rather than jump all over their play time with our adult ideas and concepts let them be free to play their game how they want to and on their own terms with no interference from the sidelines.

 

Our ways and our we know best ideology doesn't encourage kids, they actually discourages kids as the number who drop out of the sport altogether not long after joining up show.

 

As an adult you can be far a far bigger influence on their development by encouraging kids with words and advice and not instruction, commands, drills and so on.

 

Tell your kid to stop drawing on the walls and they will ask "why". Because its naughty. "But why is it naughty Mummy.  Because I said so.

 

Err, OK then.

 

Downs pens and says no more.

 

In football terms telling or instructing your kid how to play the game cuts off their curious mind in the same absolute way "because I said so" does.

 

Err, OK then.

 

Downs the imagination and says no more.

 

When I was coaching or trying to coach my own nephew I quickly realised that all my elaborate methods and ideas could not develop in him the basics as quickly and as naturally as the game could itself. Passing, shooting and crossing drills did not develop in him better technique either. That came from simple advice and encouragement which he himself used as a motivational tool to improve his game through the natural learning process which along with curiosity and the game itself is a far more potent development aid than any coaching syllabus or apparatus.

[Pilko]

After skim-reading that mountain of a post, I mostly agree with the notion of kids learning by functioning on there own and kids getting taught things - the differences you said are pretty much spot on.