The State Institute Challenge is back on this week and hopefully some good football will be played and some decent players will reward their coaches.

And guess who has a week off (again).


Edited by Incoming: 3/12/2012 02:02:57 AM

Information seems to be closely guarded about when our NTC teams play in tournaments.


I think it is the same for most NTC tournaments isn't it?

I think you will find that since Han Bergers appointment there has been less emphasis on the importance of State and NTC tournaments.

More emphasis is on keeping the squads together longer and training for longer periods to provide better development outcomes.

The tournaments are seen more as an oppurtunity to see how player and coaching standards are progressing.

First session out the way. Many of the same players as last year as it's 96 and 97 again for most.

Qld looked good against Vic and had control of midfield for most of it.
NNSW looked like they had more possession but NSW opned them up a couple of times to score after some nice passes.
Tassie dominated possession and got a deserved draw late on. Many goals against the flow of possession.
SA comfortable albeit a bit cocky against a hard-working but overmatched NT side. Game of wingers and overlaps.

No real stand-outs thus far. Some nice team play. Looks like better quality than last year overall.

Day 1 morning session:

QAS 2-0 VIC
NNSWIS 0-2 NSWIS
ACTAS 3-3 TIS
SASI 3-1 NT

Very, very disappointing from the NNSWIS point of view. So much possession, territory, but they didn't test the NSW GK enough and crossing was poor. A GK howler saw NSW open the scoring and another poor piece of defending led to a second goal 1 minute before the end. A classic case of not capitalising on their domination of the game.

Day 1 afternoon session:

WA 2-1 NSWIS
SASI 3-0 NNSWIS

ACTAS ?-? VIC
TAS ?-? NT

Afternoon day one saw WA beat a tired looking NSW team 2-1 despite a bizarre own goal that dribbled over the line. ACT then looked comfortable against VIC with significant possession only to give it away late to a nice through ball and finish from the Vic left winger for a 2-1 ACT loss. I was unable to stay for the last two games but believe SA beat Northen NSW 3-0, an improvement on their result against NT in the morning session. I haven't heard about the Tassie / NT game. Most games have been fairly tight with both teams under pressure in the middle of the park. There have been a significant number of goals resulting from forwards putting pressure on defenders trying to play it out from the back, either directly or from the resulting corner.

ACTAS 1-2 VIC

Day 2 morning session:

NNSWIS 5-0 NT
ACTAS 6-1 WA
VIC ?-? SASI
NSWIS ?-? QAS

There was a big discussion about this at the FFA Regional Conference and it has continued into the C Licence.

The goals scored in your post by capitalising on mistakes made by opponents is termed Reactive football. FFA consider Australian football has been reactive before 2005.

The notion is to play Proactive football instead - circulation football, trying to dominate. One would hope more goals at the NTC tournament would be scored through Proactive football, not waiting for mistakes.

Edited by Decentric: 4/12/2012 11:30:14 PM

Pressing the other team while in possession can't be considered proactive?

What I'm alluding to is that FFA wants Australian teams to win games through proactive play, rather than waiting for other teams to make mistakes.

The FFA National Curriculum has been written with these tenets in mind. The NC is an eclectic mix of the methodology of countries that Australia wants to emulate in playing style - France, Holland, Germany, Spain, Argentina and Brazil.

Unlike what most people think , that the FFA NC is Dutch based, it isn't. I know this because I've done Dutch training. There are some interesting differences which I'm seeing in the C Licence.

These NTC tournaments are where teams and coaches are appraised by the upper echelons of the FFA coaching hierarchy. Playing a style of football which is consistent with the National Curriculum objectives is paramount. If teams play long ball, which Victoria was renowned for, there is a strong possibility that NTC coaches will lose their jobs.

Edited by Decentric: 5/12/2012 08:30:51 AM

I'm always interested in seeing how Tasmania perform under the tutelage of Dean May. They have lost some experienced and good players recently. I'm not sure if he still has the Foley brothers and De Schmitt in the Tassie NTC program?

I've been under his tutelage a lot this year in FFA coaching courses.

DM is also the Australian assistant under 20s, or under 23 coach, to Alistair Edwards.

I know what you're alluding to and I'm disputing it.

I'll repeat myself - if a Team A is pressing Team B high up the park while Team B is in possession, forcing an error. Why would this be considered "reactive play"? Surely this would be PROACTIVE?

How can you assume that it's reactive just by reading a few online posts?

[quote=MidfieldMaestro][quote=MidfieldMaestro]Day 1 afternoon session:

WA 2-1 NSWIS
SASI 3-0 NNSWIS

ACTAS 1-2 VIC

Day 2 morning session:

NNSWIS 5-0 NT
ACTAS 6-1 WA

Great result for ACTAS against WA 6-1....seeing as WA won NSWIS 2-1??

Actas seem to always punch above their weight.

NNSWIS 0- 1 VS QAS
VIC 1- 0 WA Good result for Vic considering all their players are 1997 born playing against older opponents.
TAS 0 - 0 NSW
TAS 0 - 2 SA
ACT 2 - 0 Northern Territory

QLD VS WA ??
NNSW VS ACT ??
VIC VS NSW ??

Edited by slee45: 5/12/2012 07:36:07 PM

NSWIS are ok, but I haven't been blown away by them, despite their good results and infinite technical points.

WA had their keeper sent off in the 6-1 loss, but it was already 3-1 at the time of the sending off.

ACTAS and TIS have really, really impressed me this week.

Just to fill in the blanks for you:

QLD 1-0 WA
NNSW 0-1 ACT
VIC 0-3 NSW

Although most state institutes have many more players to choose from, ACT probably have the second least behind NT with Tassie coming next.
TIS and Northern are allowed 3 over age players in their squads but ACTAS was not. Thats why I say they punch above their weight.

Was really impressed with NNSW central midfielder today. Has a great presence and bossed the midfield. Pity for NNsw that he copped a bad knock and could not come back on in the second half. Might have been a different result. ;)

Edited by spathi: 5/12/2012 08:48:41 PM

So the National curriclum is still producing technically inept players.

The issue is defenders and goalkeepers being poor when playing out, it is not always on, therefore you must go beyond the first line.

Both NNSW and WA have been poor in this area.

No, not quite like that. Probably producing more players that are proactive and create relentless pressure on the opposition where eventually they break them down. Playing out from the back every time can be very easily targeted by the opposition, so they can be set up to create this pressure and take advantage of it. Only the better teams can actually manage to play out every time and even then there are some scary moments.

First post =d> welcome to the site.

Agree, there is a level of risk with this and young players will make errors of judgement.

And the skeptics though its all dutch and only dutch because Berger is the TD, how naive of them to say that ;)

Out of curiousity Decentric, what parts of the NC have a Spanish, French or German compenents?

Just thinking is it wise to always play out from the back ? Shouldn't we encourage the kids to sometimes think outside the square and not be so predictable?

Edited by slee45: 6/12/2012 04:12:00 AM

I recall watching the last u17 wc final & seeing the Mexican boys playing at times several passes in their own 18 yard to find a way out. Remember thinking then that Aus will never play like that.

Morning results:

QAS 1-0 ACTAS
SA 1-0 WA
NNSWIS 5-1 TIS

Not sure on the VIC vs NT score, but I'm pretty sure Victoria won.

I don't want to derail the thread, but many sceptics of the FFA NC have no knowledge whatsoever of what the FFA NC content really is.

The closest I have heard about informed view is when Aussiesrus says he knows guys who are SAP trainers, but have reservations of the content.

There are only 12 people in Australia who precisely know which parts are from which federation in the NC. My educated guess is the four phase training ground practice, which I've delineated in the KNVB/NC/ Clairefontaine thread, is that the NC is based on Clairefontaine match analysis. It is more thorough than the KNVB, but possibly a little over-planned. Even an Aussie coach and a state TD aren't sure, knowing it is one or the other. Not having trained in KNVB, they don't know what KNVB is. I do.

It is also more to do with comments I've seen written over the years. It is doubtful the Germans, heavily borrowing on KNVB, or the Spanish would have such a thorough match analysis/training ground proforma. Next time Alistair Edwards comes down I hope to find out for sure.