There are quite a few coaches who have posted on this forum recently, who have been involved in selection trials. It was an interesting process with a lot of players trying out for a FFA rep team, who showed a very good attitude. In the past I've only had to omit a very small number.

One of 442's long term posters has been very frustrated with some of the selection criteria used for selection in rep teams in his neck of the woods. He would like ours. The criteria we had to use, with an edict from FFA, was TIC.


Technical

The four core skill in the FFA National Curriculum are:

First touch (the most important core skill).

Striking the ball.

Running with the ball.

1v1 (defensively and offensively).





Insight (Game Sense)

I used this more than the state FFA senior staff coach, to evaluate players.




Communication

It didn't quite get close enough to look at this attribute as being a determining factor of selection for any players over others. The former rep/state players were effective in this area.





I did the trials in conjunction with a very senior state FFA staff coach, as we had a lot of players. We set up the Chelsea Academy drill, Turning Into Space, as a Warm Up. I have made a thread about this, on this page.

There are many technical areas to asses in this exercise. A player's ability to receive and turn, their receiving body shape, their ball carrying, their ability to one and two touch return pass, were possible to evaluate. So we had three core skills to evaluate, but not under game pressure.

Next I set up the 5v3 rondo I've sent out to about seventeen 442 posters via email. This was okay, but for the second trial, we went straight into games after the aforementioned delineated Warm Up.

The first trial was like this:

2 games of equal numbers ( four teams). They all played each other. One game was scrutinised by the FFA staff coach, the other by me. Then we swapped.

He had two categories of players. Those who the FFA staff coach thought were up to a criterion based standard. The second were a group who he appraised as definitely below it.

Being a lot more experienced, he categorised these two groups much more quickly than me. I deferred to his experience, but when looking at the same players, reached similar conclusions. Without him, it would have taken a lot longer. Moreover, he also identified suitable positions for the players he identified as having the requisite ability.

His experience was invaluable in the first trial, more so than the second. The planning for the second trial was determined by his experience and evaluation skills.


The proposal from the conclusion of this first trial session, was that the FFA staff coach suggested leaving the definites and those unsuitable, to play against each other in the second trial, with minimal scrutiny being required. I organised this, with a few tweaks (being a teacher, so they wouldnt work out what we were doing).

Then we could really scrutinise the possibles, in the other game.



The second trial:

At the second trial I planned, we did the same Warm Up, albeit for a shorter period of time. We planned a lot more time to observe players in games. We needed it too. Selections went down to the wire.

We broke off into two games. It was interesting . A lot of the players who had been through state/rep programs, were able to play combination football together, with one twos and third man runs. They were also able to play in triangles. However, not all previous state/rep players were selected straight into the definites.

I was pretty keen on a couple of guys who showed sound game sense, with good decision-making on the ball. They were pretty average athletes, but to me they could play intelligent football.

Another player I brought to the trial, showed good goal instincts and ability to win 1v1 in tight spaces. He was very small, but pleasingly won a few block tackling, 50/50 duels, which I thought would be his weakness. After winning those, he went straight into the squad of 16. I thought I was biased, so I consulted the FFA staff coach for a second opinion. The small migrant player worked hard with us at CFP and only a short time ago he was in refugee camp in another country !

The FFA staff coach wanted another who was a bustling player, with speed and strength, but I wasn't happy he displayed sufficient technique.

Another former star performer, a good technician, wasn't showing enough tenacity and desire at the session.The FFA staff coach would have selected him much earlier, but I still wasn't happy selecting him.

The bustling , strong, athletic player still couldn't convince me either. Not enough of TIC for me, compared to some lesser athletes, but who had good game sense.

Then another player decisively outmuscled a player I had selected in a 1v1, then held him off to score. He made a superb tackle. That player winning this 1v1 and scoring was selected from that one decisive action.

The star technical player , who to me wasn't performing, suddenly got interested, and did some good work on the ball.

The bustling player, showed some speed and decent ball carrying speed, but what won me over was his work rate off the ball in the end. He also was good in the 1v1 winning the ball duels. Interestingly enough, he was a state player recently, but under a different coach evaluating, yours truly, he only just scraped into a lower level squad.


We had our 16 with five minutes to go. We agreed on the composition of the squad.

Then right at the end, the FFA staff coach picked out a strongly built guy who was playing out from the back in a central position. The FFA staff coach thought he was in the squad already. I realised he wasn't!

He looked excellent as a ball playing CB. I couldn't believe I'd missed him!#-o

We then had to take out one of the 16 to make way for him. Ultimately, the FFA staff coach suggested a player who had gone out of the game, for the last 10 minutes, but who had played better earlier.

With the the lack of time, I agreed with it. So the poor guy lost his spot! A decision had to be made, and I was happy for the FFA staff coach to make it.

It ended with me making a speech, thanking all players for trialling, and saying I wish I could select all of them, but that we had to make some tough decisions. I also alluded to how difficult it was to make selections. I encouraged all players to try out again next year and prove us wrong if they were not selected. I wished them all the best for the future.






I intend to create effective liaison with the feeder/consitutent clubs. FFA rep programs have sometimes not enjoyed much popularity with constituent clubs.









Edited by Decentric: 5/3/2013 12:14:54 AM

Edited by Decentric: 5/3/2013 12:41:20 AM

Edited by Decentric: 6/3/2013 12:17:17 AM

Edited by Decentric: 7/3/2013 09:43:10 AM

Edited by Decentric: 10/3/2013 03:18:42 PM