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.

It will happen eventually, when all the recalcitrants are dragged in to coach in a uniform system.

Remember these tournaments are seen as development. The object is to develop a proactive playing style, like they do in the countries we want to emulate in playing style.

Reactive football may see short term results, but will not assist the development of a national playing style, a proactive one. It is much easier to play longer, direct passes later in a player's development when over the age of 19. The FFA belief is that no really successful team in world football plays a reactive style of football.

It continues that to be a top ten nation, we desperately need to play out under pressure from the back when other decent teams full press and intensively squeeze us. Germany, Brazil, Holland, France, Argentina and Spain can do this at a higher level than we are capable of playing - yet.

The QAS coach had a go at a keeper for missing the 1st line in the preperation game for this carnival

so why dont FFA allow teams to practice like this in games rather than discouraging pressing. Trying to hide the problem that Aus isnt producing the players.

[quote=slee45 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[/quote]

yes , play the furthest safest pass

Pressing is encouraged in fact it plays a major role in the assessment of teams at the NTC championships. That and having the ability to play out from the back whilst this pressure is being applied. It doesnt always come off but most teams have the ability to play out. Dont forget that these are 14, 15 and 16 year olds, they are learning and learning fast. Thanks must go out to all the NTC coaches for the work they have put in to these teams as the standard of football being played is way above what has been seen in previous NTC championships.

For anyone still interested in results:

Afternoon session:

NSWIS 1-0 SA
QAS 1-0 NT
NNSWIS 1-0 VIC
WA 2-5 TIS (Not 100% on this, but it was 1-4 at HT and I only know of 1 goal a piece in the second half.)

in the qld JPL the feeder to the qas, teams are asked not to press the other team playing out.

x2.

Welcome to the forum, Mervan.

By who?

I'll pass that on, Spathi.

The NTC coach from this state will be assessing me for the C Licence. A few of us have made a lot of comments he would prefer us not to in the course.

It will be an excuse to ingratiate myself. This guy is an excellent coach. His forte is lecturing and the putting on demonstration coaching sessions with the NTC for hundreds of coaches at once. He is also the national under 23 or under 20 assistant coach to Alistair Edwards.

At some stage a team cannot cope with intensive squeezing and full pressing.

Arsenal had never encountered the level that Barcelona applied to them and struggled in ball possession.

When the Tassie NTC plays, other club teams try intensive squeezing and full pressing to beat them. Occasionally it succeeds. Usually the NTC prevails. Even if they lose, they usually dominate possession.

As a Tasmanian I'm pleased by this.:d However, one has to view these tournaments as development not results.

Saw the NTC at the FFA Regional Conference a few weeks ago. Their coach, Dean May, took a superb demonstration coaching session. A few of us thought they looked technically weak. Having said that I think they've lost three three star players from last year.






Edited by Decentric: 6/12/2012 11:18:44 PM

Agreed. However it seems that the powers that be don't always see it that way. I'll leave it at that.

I've been quite impressed by Tassie this week. They've definitely punched above their weight. The only poor game they've played was the 5-1 loss this morning to NNSWIS where they were ripped to pieces in every aspect of the game. They bounced back well this afternoon by dishing this out to WA. Don't be surprised to see a few TIS boys in that all star squad.

If it wasn't for the minimum time rule any team could win this tourney. All players must play a minimum amount of minutes, sometimes this can weaken a team as the depth is not what other states can provide. It has been a very open tournament and the results prove that any team can win, on any given game, on the day.

Edited by spathi: 6/12/2012 11:02:18 PM

Are you talking about VIS by any chance? They seem to play the long ball very very frequently.

I'm quite excited about this. We know we are the forgotten state, but our first Tasmanian product of the Tassie development system under Dean May, Jeremy Walker, has just played for Melbourne Heart this weekend.

About four of us drive Dean mad when he lectures at FFA courses, as we raise a lot of points. The other instructors like coaches raising points for discussion, but it puts Dean off his presentation.

Recently, I've thought DM is the best structural coach I've seen. He has also repeatedly offered his services to any club coaches to assist. Good on him. The only thing is the players I have at my disposal are nowhere near good enough for him to work with. He would become frustrated I think.

I might text him. I think he would be pretty pleased with your comments.






Edited by Decentric: 6/12/2012 11:21:06 PM

Victoria was renowned for this 5 years ago when I did my FFA Youth Licence. The instructor spoke about it incessantly.

If they are still doing it, Han Berger will be livid!:x I don't know how some people at Victoria are keeping their jobs if this has continued.

No, not VIS. I'm talking about other teams who don't play the best of games (technically speaking) but manage to get a good result and pick up more technical points than they deserve.

For me, the centre-back and the centre-forward are Tassie's standouts from what I have seen of them. Mind you, I haven't watched all of Tassie's games, I've also received feedback from what others have seen of them.


Edited by MidfieldMaestro: 6/12/2012 11:27:29 PM

Of course full pressing, and intensive squeezing is proactive play in BPO. I was alluding to BP when the tenets of FFA NC are appraised. Australia's mode of winning most games in the eighties and nineties , apart from when Terry Venables was coach, was to score goals from other teams' mistakes - not from intricate combination play, or from acts of individual, sublime skill.

I think your intent, unlike most others who post on here, is to troll and derail like JF. And, yes there has also been discussion by FFA in recent coaching conferences and courses about passing the ball harder to avoid interceptions.](*,)

Interesting to make comparisons. I know one of the Capital Football coaching staff. Capital Football had 17000 - 19000 players this year from a population base of 320 000, I think.

Tasmania only has 14 000 registered footballers from a population base of 500 000. The 14 000 is declining too.

Day 5 results:

WA 1-5 NNSWIS
NSWIS 3-0 NT
QAS 1-0 TAS
ACTAS 2-1 SA



Edited by MidfieldMaestro: 7/12/2012 12:32:01 PM

With this in mind, I checked Vic's technical points this morning. They have been rated the worst at implementing the national curriculum. They've been getting 2/10 and 3/10 every day for technical points.

On this note, NNSWIS were awarded 2/10 for the first day, which is an absolute joke. They outplayed NSWIS, had about 80% of the ball, controlled the game, did everything but score. NSWIS scored 2 very late goals through individual errors, then played average that afternoon vs WA but picked up 6/10 for that day. Sure, NNSWIS were poor vs SA, but 2/10??? Get out. More like a 5/10 for that day would be fair.

Because of this travesty, it's going to cost NNSWIS. Since this day, they've been getting 6, 7 and 8/10 for their technical ability and COULD be second on technical points. What game those selectors were watching on the first day is anyone's guess.

Looking at the technical table right now and ACTAS got 3 points on the first day for drawing with Tassie and losing to Vic who played the long ball all game, then the next 2 days running got 8 points (2 games per day), 5 points (1 game) and 7 points today for a win (1 game). To be fair though the first day against Tassie they were a little nervous and the second game played Vic off the park while they pumped 2 long balls and scored twice, but 3 point from 2 games ](*,) ](*,) seriously ](*,) ](*,)

Where can I find the table?

I’ve attended every NTC tournament since they started in the current format in 07, here are my thoughts on the week.
Positives

- Almost every state to an extent has embraced the curriculum and is focusing on the performance more so than the final result. There are some exceptions who are reverting to old habits when they lead by a goal late on but in the main teams are playing 4-3-3, attempting to play out from the back and keep possession. Victoria has copped a hiding in the technical points (highest daily score for them was 3/10) but every other state has embraced the FFA’s philosophy with varying degrees of success.

- The smaller states Tasmania and NT have been as competitive as they have ever been. They have probably been the biggest beneficiaries of the NC. It now gives them a guideline of how to train and develop their players and they also know how the other teams will play which would also help their tactical preparation. I hope the days of Tasmania and NT parking the bus in the hope of getting a gallant point or narrow loss are long gone.

- The referees in general have also improved, I know a lot of work has been done in making the nationals and NTC tournaments an important part of the development pathway for promising referees and it seems to be working. There’s still the odd howler or card happy ref but the general standard is better than a few years ago.

Negatives

- Unfortunately I will be leaving this tournament without seeing any individuals who really excite me. In particular the quality of strikers has been poorer than recent years. There hasn’t been that player or two who you just know in a couple of years will be gracing the A-League and wowing the country. In past tournaments there have always been one or two attacking players that have lit up the tournament, a couple of years ago it was Teeboy and Garuccio for SASI and they’ve already made it to the A-League, before that it was Babalj, Antonis, Oar, Taggart (all now Socceroos), Gameiro, Bulut. There has been some very good players but none of the quality of the aforementioned players when they were 15/16.

- I guess this is an extension of the last point but as some people have mentioned here a lot of the goals are coming from teams losing possession deep in their own half. Probably the next most prolific method of scoring has been through the wingers getting behind a high defensive line. There have been very few goals coming from creative interplay through the middle of the park against a set defence. A lot of teams have struggled to break down a good defensive unit, something Australian football has always had a problem with. I believe the main reason is because most teams are too structured in attack and stick to the mandated style too rigidly. Players are not being taught too think creatively and no one has really broken the mould. As an example, I watched Tasmania put 5 past WA but their goals were from turnovers by the WA defenders and midfielders, not from Tasmania breaking down the WA defence after sustained possession.

- There have been too many cases of teams receiving credit for attempting to play the right way but failing. They fail because either their technique was off or they are making a poor decision that has been pre-programmed into them. WA in particular in some games found the opposing midfielder more times than their own yet they seem to pick up a decent amount of technical points each day. Teams are given credit for attempting to play the FFA’s mandated style not whether they actually succeed at it.

- This has already been mentioned here but some of the technical points scores have been puzzling. Unfortunately most teams I think will go away surprised and disappointed with at least one of their day’s scores.

- This tournament still seems to be hidden from the public. I know Han Berger’s reasons but I still think there should be some reporting on this tournament from the FFA and even videos of the games uploaded online.

Anyway, that was a long post and some may agree and disagree with what I’ve written but that’s my perspective based on what I’ve seen over the years. A forum thread like this is good so people can share the results and their opinions but Berger would hate it.

*Agree with everyone (except the Vics it would seem) embracing the aim of the national curriculum.

*Agree with the fact that NT and TAS have largely improved and are making a game of it/winning by playing the 'right' way.

*Perhaps no-one 'stood out' to you because the tournament was so close and evenly matched? That's what I took out of this week. My opinion only.

*Did you watch all the games? (Not having a go at you, serious question). I saw several goals where teams managed to break down a 'set defence' after sustained possession. Eg. NNSW had a huge amount of possession vs Victoria and their winning goal started with the left fullback and was finished from close range by the right-winger without Victoria touching the ball during the move which lead to the aforementioned goal. That's just one off the top of my head. I do agree though, that a large number of goals came about through turnovers. WA struggled big time in this regard, I agree.

*About the technical points, I still think it's fair to award decent points for a team that loses 0-1 but outplays the opposition who scored a lucky goal but didn't play all that well. I don't think the team should be penalised for poor finishing of one or two players. Having said that, some teams were awarded more points than they deserved, I agree with you there.

*Why does Berger 'hide' this tournament?


I agree and disagree with various points you've raised, but I appreciate your thoughts and discussion.

Edited by MidfieldMaestro: 7/12/2012 10:02:47 PM

Just back from the dinner/presentation function. This one's for you, Decentric.

When naming the 'All-Star' coaches (which were the coaches from QAS and NNSW), he made a special mention of Dean May and the great work he's done with Tasmania. Han Berger seemed very pleased with him. Although Tassie weren't as good in the back half of the week, I think the coaches and the players can be very proud of their efforts.

Great to see the NNSW midfielder I mentioned earlier get a spot on the Allstars team. His name is Andrew Pawaik. Look out for this kid as he has something special. No doubt he will be amongst the Jets sooner rather than later.

For anyone who's interested, Berger was saying that in his opinion, the standard is improving every year and the all-star team + the player of the tournament was very tough to choose because of the quality etc etc.

BTW, special mention for ACTAS, who got 3 or 4 players into the all-star squad. Definitely punched above their weight. A 4th place finish and equal 2nd on technical points reflects that. =d>

I even think one of their forwards deserved a spot on the all-star team, he was very unlucky to miss out.

Oh! And the player of the tournament was the CB from ACTAS!!! =d>

Edited by MidfieldMaestro: 7/12/2012 10:19:16 PM

Wow did we cop a flogging about Victoria's adherence to the National Curriculum style of play.

We have issues which generally come down to poor management and organizational culture.

We are to a man glad to see the back of our previous CEO Mark Rendell.

While there are a range of issues that are non-coaching related which need to be addressed on the elite coaching side we have some core issues.

Personally I would prefer the FFV Technical Director and our skillaroos coach to say it like it is in Victoria. There is too much glossing over of our coaching and playing standards.








If you read these articles from the FFV website you would think that in Victoria we are on the right track.

Edited by Arthur: 8/12/2012 10:52:14 AM

Edited by Arthur: 8/12/2012 10:53:38 AM

That is some serious glossing over there Arthur. Vic not only played a lot of long ball but they came last in the technical points table with a grand total of 12.5 points. Most teams had a mix of 15 and 16 year olds while the 15 year olds were predominant. Some teams even had 14 year olds. With the minimum time rule for all teams (200 minutes) I can assure you that every team have had a mix of 15 and 16 year olds on the park in all games. BTW only 1 player from Vic selected for the Allstars game and that was the goalkeeper.

To be honest I'm not surprised, but I am disappointed at our results Spathi.

I am no fan of the NTC program in Melbourne but it is what it is.

Many in Melbourne will blame the FFV Technical Director, the NTC Coach, the FFV for providing inadequate training facilities and the selection process wether it be how, who and those that rejected the offer.

I just reckon its false development taking the best 15yo olds out of the general playing pool, matching them against boys up to 3 years their senior in U18 Competition.

Nabbout and Leckie where not part of these type of programs their must be something wrong.

Spathi is their a link to the technical points table?

lets see who is going to wint he title of final is it actas or tis

NTC CHALLENGE FINAL

NSW GROUP WINNER VS SA (BONUS POINTS WINNER)
SA BONUS POINTS 36

NSW 3- SA 1

No but i can post it for you

SA-----------36
ACTAS--------31
NNSW--------31
QAS----------30
NSW----------29
FW-----------26
FFT----------24
NT-----------17
FFV----------12.5

After 8 games

Thanks Spathi! Can you post the points table as well? Much appreciated.

Edited by slee45: 8/12/2012 08:41:36 PM

I tend to disagree with you on that point Arthur.
Here in the ACT the ACTAS boys played against the reserve grade squads of the local premier league clubs. The competition with ACTAS involved would have created a bye so they played on a Tuesday night so as not to create a bye. The clubs used this to there advantage and brought first graders in so as they could take the points for the club championship and reserve grade advancement. Remember these boys were 14, 15, 16 and there were 3, 17 year olds. As it happened the boys acquitted themselves quite well finishing sixth in a competition of 9 and they trained on a cow paddock. In fact the eventual grad final winners beat them 6-5. So my point is that its not where they train its who is training them.

5 weeks out from NTC the ACTAS coach resigned leaving the preparation of the squad in tatters. There were trials held due to the fact that the 3, 17 year olds were not permitted to participate in the NTC. That took 2 weeks. They played 3 three friendly games after that and the last week and a half the squad was used for B license, A license and state coaching conference courses. So as you can see it was not the ideal prep a squad would need leading into a big tournament like the NTC.

I would suggest that the coaching initiatives implemented by FFV and the NTC coach were not up to the standard required for an elite group of players from Victoria.

I am not a fan of 2 nights a week training with a club that have players of a level less than that required to reach a higher level of play. I am in favour of an elite squad training 4 or 5 nights a week with a game included, that has high intensity and where players push each other to reach a higher level at each and every session.

No worries;)

State -- W -- L -- D-- G-dif-- P
NSW -- 6 -- 1 -- 1-- 12-- 19
QAS -- 6 -- - 1 -- 1 -- 6-- 19
SA -- 4 -- 2-- 2-- 6-- 14
ACTAS-- 4 -- 3 -- 1-- 8-- 13
NNSW -- 4 -- 4 -- 0-- 7-- 12
FFT -- 3 -- 3-- 2-- 1-- 11
FFV -- 3 -- 4-- 1-- -3-- 10
NT -- 2-- 5-- 1-- -19-- 7
FW -- 1 -- 6-- 1-- -14-- 4

There you go

Edited by spathi: 8/12/2012 08:57:25 PM

Spathi I see ACT did well this year with the technical points etc.. Seeing as the coach resigned, who is the new coach??

The new Technical Director took control of the squad, Warren Grieves ex WA. Did a great job.

In fact the team should not have lost a game, but such is football.

Edited by spathi: 8/12/2012 09:16:50 PM

Exhibition match:

All Stars 2-0 NSWIS.

All Star Team Breakdown:

NSW - 7
SA - 5
ACT - 4
NNSW - 4
QAS - 2
VIC - 1

Vics 3 wins 1 draw and 4 losses, only finishing above WA and NT, got a hell of a long way to go if you ask me, tell me why would the coach take younger kids when Vics aren't even a strong state??? I can give him some advice, at least grab an older centre back, one or two older midfielders and a striker and that would sort out a couple of more wins, build the younger ones around these older guys! Why are we always a step behind the other states!

What has happened?

Last year Victoria finished something like 2nd in results and where believed to have played the best football by the Australain U17 coach, as well as getting something like 5 players into the All-Star squad.

I agree with mattb, the coaches should have selected some 1996 boys, as this age group is clearly very strong for them as we see from last years results.They seemed to play a mix of the 96 and 97 boys in there local league competition and did well.

It's common sense to take older kids, it's not like at the local level when you can play kids up and they can still outplay the average players, at the national level surely one gun older player can make a huge difference. It seems that other states took 7 or 8 older boys, which is basically a starting XI except for say your GK and your fullbacks. So you play these older kids with 2 or 3 younger players against the stronger states like NSW and QLD, then against NT and TAS and maybe even WA by the sounds of it, you give game time to the younger kids and rest your older players. Bit of a farce really anyway that states can take a range of ages, why not just make everyone play the same age kids then you can compare apples with apples. Anyway same old same old for the Vics

I think Vic did not do too bad considering they played older opponents...Most teams had 96 born players and a few 97. WA had twelve 96 born players & only six 97 and Vic won 1-0. But I guess maybe you right, if they had at least 4 quality 96 born players in the team, it would have been a better result. The younger kids who play older opponents do tend to at times boot the long ball out of frustration, as physically they can't match the stronger kids. I would also suggest that kids at these competitions should play in their own age groups at National level. Unless their is the odd one or 2 gifted players than can play a year up. Kids develop at different ages.. and the younger ones can be overlooked sometimes because they can't match it against older kids.

Out of curiosity were any players that stood out in this tournament, how was technical level compared to previous years? Has the standard got better from previous years? Anyone know?

Ok in that case then maybe I have been a bit too tough on the Vic team, I suppose if you are playing older kids that are guns then you would end up stuck in front of your goals defending for your lives, especially if some teams have 12 older kids, which is the full starting XI plus a bench player. And then you have to only play the very best 4 kids from the younger age group, actually seems pretty unfair when I think about it more.

No wonder the GK made the rep all star team, he was probably peppered with shots all tournament, he would have loved it.

Seems pretty ridiculous that the Australian federation would allow this, time for a new rule sheet

On the topic of player ages, NNSW had about half 96's, about half 97's and a couple of 98's. The squad was very well rotated and players got good game time. This team (after being 1 and 4 after day 3, won their next 3 games) placed equal 2nd on the technical points table.

Good finish by NNSW then credit to the coach as must have been tough after a slow start.

From digging at halftime in socceroos match, which is similar by the way as we look much bigger faster stronger than chinese taipai, it seems as though these states had older kids

NNSW - 7 older kids
WA - 12 older kids
ACT - 7 older kids
TAS - 7 or 8 older kids and maybe even a couple older still, surely not allowed??
VICS - 0

Sorry couldn't find anything on NSW QLD SA NT or any others that I may have missed, someone else might know

Spathi I will reply firstly with this quote;



Secondly I would suggest the success rate of the NTC players at this tournament would be around 5% or less and by success I mean make the A-League. With our limited resources we need to get this higher closer to 10% or more so a lot more study needs to conducted for sure.

Out of curiosity, how did you find these? I searched a while ago for squad lists but couldn't find those, let alone player ages.

I'm pretty sure TAS and NT have provisions to include older players to ensure as level a playing field as possible (due to small populations).

And yes, great finish for NNSW. Although they were 1 and 4 at one stage, of the 4 losses they were the better team in 3 of them. The coach was awarded all-star assistant for helping turn it around (results wise) and for the way they played the whole way through.

Have a scroll through this thread and in another from a week or two ago on this forum, people comment on squad players and mention older and younger players for some states. one of the states info was a quick google search, maybe that was Tas? Nothing on NSW QLD or others

Good point fair call, if states like NT and TAS didn't bring older kids then they would probably lose most of their matches

And this why ACTAS punch above their weight, with a small pool of players to choose from came 4th in the points table and could have been even higher and 2nd in the technical table. All this without 1 overage player. And I'll go as far to say that even with 3 losses no team dominated them for the whole of any game not NSW ( 1-0 loss) who won the points table not SA who won the technical table (who they beat 2-1) nor Qland (1-0 loss last kick of the game).

I can go on about the squad size and how the 16 year olds didnt get as much game time as some would expect but this team exceeded all expectations from all involved, even the coaching staff.


@ Arthur, mate we are in Australia not Europe so what they do as per junior squads and what is achievable here are to different worlds let alone the level of coaching available at most clubs. Is there a better alternative currently here in Australia? I don't think so, can it improve I'm sure of that. So until such a time where there are 20 - 30 professional clubs in Australia, the status quo has to be the way forward. would say that Vic needs a better coach and technical director, I have someone in mind but whether he wants to do it or will even be considered is another story for another day.

I am with you mate not against you but the way things are in Australia it is very difficult to move sideways until we move forward first: i.e. players parents from each and every NTC has to pay for their to have the opportunity represent their state in a national tournament, tell me anywhere in the world other than USA where this is the case ](*,) I say no more.:-#

Edited by spathi: 9/12/2012 10:18:55 PM

Edited by spathi: 9/12/2012 10:20:30 PM

The end of the tournament always throws up some surprises. Just shows that different coaches and observers see different things in players, rely on players' previous representative selections or feel the need to match numbers against where the teams ended up.

I must say the tournament was played at a decent standard, albeit with a limited (in variation) interpretation of the 4-3-3. Two teams played worse both technically and tactically, being VIC and WA, although WA did start off with a solid win against NSW. SA, QLD, NNSW and NSW did not appear to have improved markedly although they played some decent games. NT played some solid football with their standout being a skilled if relatively small number 10. ACTAS and Tasmania did indeed out-perform. ACTAS played some very attractive football and Tasmania were very solid in just about every game.

I agree with other commentators in that there were very few stand-out players in this tournament. There were some players who played some passes with good vision - ie. number 8 for NSW, 6 and 8 for ACTAS, 11 for NNSW - and some players who displayed energy and quickness - ie. number 10 for NNSW and 9 for Queensland. I did not think NSW had 7 players that were all stars. In my view most of their success came in transition. The VIC and QLD GK can thank a relatively weak field, although one of the ACTAS GK produced similar performances. The player of the tournament, the ACTAS left sided CB can probably also thank a relatively weak field for his selection. Only number 4 for Tasmania stood out to any extent in my mind. The ACTAS left back (5) and SA right back (2) also had very good tournaments, although the latter was given a bit of a touch up by the ACTAS winger in their game. In a system meant to focus on and enhance wing play I though there were not enough good performances out wide with any degree of consistency unlike last year. Number 6 for ACTAS was very unlucky to miss selection in my eyes. The only forwards I rated were number 14 for NSW and - ironically - number 9 for Victoria, who basically carried his team on his broad shoulders, scoring goals as required and working hard in defence when the team was down to 10 men on at least one occasion.

Again, all a matter of perception. A distinct lack of creativity overall but a decent standard of play in most games.

PS. Not sure who the number 10 for the all-stars was - I missed a few games - but he stood out a bit as well (as did the player of the tournament George the CB from ACTAS).

Bring on 2013.

If you got to see a 16 year old Babalj, Oar or Antonis at this tournament then you would understand what I'm getting at. Same goes for a teenage Viduka or Kewell. When you see them you just knew that they were special and that in a few years they would be a Socceroo. 4 years ago everyone who watched Babalj play for WA knew they had seen a future Socceroo, same goes for Antonis with NSWIS that same tournament. Sure enough this past week Babalj, Antonis and Taggart are in the Socceroos squad just 3-4 years after they played in this tournament. Anyone who saw Antonis, Amini and Gameiro playing together for the NSW 14s in Coffs wouldn't be surprised to know that now one is a Socceroo, one is at Dortmund and the other at Fulham. Is there a player from this tournament that you could say with some certainty that they will be a Socceroo in 2016? I didn't see one. That's not to say there weren't some excellent players who will go onto professional careers and maybe there were some future Socceroos who will get there eventually (the Northern boy Spathi mentioned being one such player) but there wasn't that 1 or 2 players that you see every now and then at these tournaments who everyone agrees is going places.


I was there for every session, every day and I've been to every NTC tournament since it began in its current format 5 years ago. I stand by my comment that the most frequent mode of scoring was from a forced or unforced turnover. Given Australia's constant problem with producing no. 10s and great strikers I think more emphasis should be on developing our player's ability to unlock a defence. At the moment more emphasis is being placed on playing out from the back and pressing high in defence, which is why so many goals were scored from turnovers.



Basically he sees tournaments like this as purely talent id and only really the selectors and coachs should have an interest in this tournament. He doesn't seem to get that there are a lot of people like the ones on this forum who want to know what's happening with our best youth and how their state compares to others.

It shouldn't be looked at that teams were using older kids. This is an under 16 tournament (with NT and TAS allowed a few 17s), Victoria stubbornly decided they would only bring 15s, I don't know what point they were trying to prove but they kept bringing it up as if they were the ones who were right and everyone else were doing the wrong thing. Most squads have always had a roughly 50-50 split between the age groups each year though the 16 year olds typically will get more game time than the 15 year olds.

A touch up? He practically tore him a new one and scored the winner with the SA right back on his heels. Yet the SA right back gets an Allstars gig yet the ACTAS 11 goes away empty handed.

This absolutely:-$

I think the best way to put it is that if the winners from 2007 played the winner's from 2012 it would be an even contest but if the last placed team from 2007 played the last placed team from 2012 the 2012 team would outplay them comfortably. The gap from top to bottom is as narrow as ever whereas a few years ago most national championships had 2-3 stand out teams who would dominate the rest and only have a couple of challenging matches between each other. Now every team is competitive and capable of outplaying any opponent. As an example this year WA's only win came against the winners NSW.

ACTAS have always managed to do very well at this tournament, they won the first one in 2007 (a team that included a 14 year old Rogic) and in 2009 finished 1st on results and 2nd on technical points but SASI came first 1st on technical points and 2nd on results and were given the title due to their two points totals combined being higher. There wasn't a match between the two winners that year, which has since been implemented.

I believe 11 (ACTAS) was very unlucky to miss the boat for the all-stars. Was the main attacking threat for ACTAS and could have had a hat-trick vs SASI on a better day.