Room for Improvement for the Young Socceroos
June 26, 2013 at 10:27 pm
Posted by Kate Cohen.


After a positive display against Columbia, the Young Socceroos failed to threaten El Salvador, who sat back and countered in a style reminiscent to Australia’s result against Oman.

Teams


Line Ups
Paul Okon named an unchanged XI, with the team retaining their 4-2-3-1 shape. Daniel de Silva, who impressed in the previous match by scoring a goal and being a constant attacking outlet, was again trusted in the important ‘Number 10’ role.

El Salvador played with two banks of four in a 4-4-1-1 without the ball and then quickly looked to get their wingers – Kevin Barahona and Jairo Henriquez – in advanced positions once possession was won, in a 4-2-3-1.

Pattern of the Match

As mentioned above, the approach of El Salvador was reminiscent of Oman’s – with two compact banks of four looking to restrict spaces for Australia when going forward and to frustrate them.

Tellingly, Australia had 61.6% of the possession, yet they only registered five shots on goal. El Salvador had nine.

For much of the match, Australia’s possession was purposeless – possession for possession’s sake. There was very little penetration with Australia’s possession, like against Oman, the ball was moved around in front of the opposition’s defensive block, as opposed to in between and in behind it.

El Salvador looked comfortable in dealing with Australia’s predictable possession.

El Salvador’s Approach

The most obvious element to El Salvador’s approach was that they looked to control space, leaving Australia to control the ball. They sat deep, sliding sideways and prevented forward passes into Australia’s front four, which limited Australia’s ability to go forward.

El Salvador especially targeted Daniel de Silva and looked to limit his involvement. One of their central midfielders, either Grannito or Gomez, positioned themselves to prevent de Silva from receiving possession – similar to how Mark Bresciano and Mark Milligan limited the impact of Keisuke Honda.

Their front two did not actively pressure the man with possession, instead occupying the most dangerous passing option. This meant that frequently, when Australia’s midfield two combined, the resulting pass would be backwards.


El Salvador closely watched de Silva and, when the midfielders looked to combine, forced Irvine and Brillante to pass backwards
In contrast, when El Salvador had possession, they moved the ball quickly and incisively and worried Australia with their movement off-the-ball.

Irvine and Brillante

Despite Brillante’s early goal, both he and Jackson Irvine failed to impact the game in an attacking sense. Both patiently circulated the ball in deep areas (including the back four and the two deepest midfielders) but rarely moved the ball beyond El Salvador’s defensive lines.

Both played ‘safe’ passes, with the intention of keeping possession, as opposed to offering penetration from midfield.

Brillante   Irvine
Total Passes (Successful)   87 (94.3%)   70 (77.1%)
1st Half (successful)    54 (94.4%)   42 (78.6%)
2nd Half (successful)    33 (93.9%)   28 (75%)

Irvine and, in particular, Brillante were effective in retaining possession, as the above numbers demonstrate; however, they were ineffective in when moving the ball forward.


Only one-in-four passes from midfield were classified as ‘forward’ passes.
By further breaking down the passing of Australia’s midfielders, looking at the intention of their passes and the outcome, it showed that Australia failed to move the ball through midfield and into advanced positions.


Possession Pass: (red) with the intention of keeping the ball
Penetration Pass: (blue) with an attacking intention which removes one or more active
Brillante   Irvine
Possession Pass (successful)   64 (98.4%)   47 (93.6%)
Penetration Pass (successful)   23 (82.6%)   23 (43.5%)
Forward Pass (successful)   21 (81%)   18 (38.9%)

Basically, whilst Brillante maintained good (‘raw’) passing numbers, only one in four passes actually impacted an opposition defender. Irvine was slightly better, with one in three passes being a ‘penetration’ pass. To have 71% of passes from Australia’s midfield not impacting El Salvador was a clear demonstration of the problems the Young Socceroos’ faced.

Of course, these numbers also show that those passes (in particular for Irvine) resulted in a drastic drop the success of that pass.

Irvine’s late substitution was warranted, given his poor performance in the match. The switch to a 4-3-3, with Brillante the deepest midfielder, gave Australia some very late life.

Cause and Effect

It’s easy to look back at the match, and to point the finger at both Brillante and Irvine as to why Australia looked monotonous and lacked creativity, but they were merely a symptom of the performance. Their inability to influence the game creatively, and to be the link from defensive possession to attacking possession, was because of other factors.

Firstly, Australia’s attacking patterns of play when the ball was in midfield areas was often static. There was little off-the-ball movement to open up spaces in El Salvador’s deep defensive unit.

Both Hoole and Pain stayed wide, with the intentions of knocking the ball past their defender and into the space in behind. However, this made them easy to contain for the fullback. Only on a few occasions, and early in the match, did Australia mix things up by playing early switches to the wingers, and Pain moved inside. However, as the match wore on, the attackers became predictable.

Similarly, de Silva struggled to receive possession and drifted into deeper areas, instead of looking to create space for teammates through coordinated off-the-ball movements. This just added to the cause – with Australia being unable to impact El Salvador’s deep block.

Another issue, which will come into question after this match, is (as a nation) Australia’s ability to problem solve when the opposition looks to limit space. The Young Socceroos, just as their senior counterparts had done against Oman, primarily focused on patience and maintaining possession – as opposed to actually working patterns of play to break their opponents down.

The speed of ball movement was too slow, with players often taking multiple touches and stopping the ball dead before passing. This was never going to move El Salvador’s defensive block around, and in fact played into their hands, because they were comfortably able to slide across and shut down forward passing options.

Spain, of course, are the international benchmark of modern possession football. When they pass with a slow tempo they do so for a reason – to get their attacking structures set to allow them to break open the opposition’s defence. As soon as they’re ready they play quick, incisive passes to create opportunities. Australia’s off-the-ball movement was too static to allow that change of tempo to occur.


Australia demonstrated an inability to change the speed of their ball movement. They failed to, after circulating the ball around slowly, coordinate off-the-ball movements to open up space in attacking areas

Conclusion

This performance showed that, despite the positives from the Columbia match, there is much development still to occur for the Young Socceroos.

The true representation of the performance will come the next time they face an opponent who looks to control the space rather than the ball. Will the players learn what is needed for next time? And, has Paul Okon and his team looked at this performance, and reflected on the possible changes that could have occurred?

At the end of the day, this competition, and youth development, is about just that – development. This is an opportunity to learn, tactically and technically, from this match and to improve for the future.


http://leopoldmethod.com.au/room-for-improvement-for-the-young-socceroos/

It's easy to be negative about these performances but I thoroughly enjoy the journey where we as a nation are learning the game together.

Yes eventually we will. But it wont happen overnight. Patience is the key.

Sorry Kate, but I am going to analyse your analysis. I really like what you do, but I should add some other factors at play. I know you also post here as Fezzie Torres.

When you post about pass completion percentages , there is a massive difference from passing at the back, when the opposition team plays a partial press or half press when they are in BPO and the defensive transition ( DT).

A player can pass the ball all day under low pressure, in plenty of time and space. It is harder for a defensive team to maintain possession at the back when the opposition plays a full press and squeezes intensively.

You also mention off the ball movement being static. This also effects then the player on the ball's ability to play forwards. A player further up the pitch needs to receive the ball diagonally. This is in order for the player to make a body position to play forwards without having to turn. At the same time the player has a full field of vision and can see the whole pitch, his/her team-mates and the opposition players.

This also effects a player's passing stats - the amount of movement ahead of them, which can depend on the ability of the players to lose their markers, by faking, or setting up dummy runs. The onus is on team-mates to create passing lanes, not just the player's ability to pass to the the target.

Also, incorrectly hit passes are often not costly in the attacking third.

What a good team does, is vary the speed of ball movement through rhythm changes.

Initially, Baan and Berger identified this as a weakness in Australian teams prior to 2007.

The staying wide is axiomatic within top European coaching methodology, KNVB or FFA NC.

A team compresses/condenses in BPO, or Ball Possession Opposition. The idea is to make the pitch as small as possible and restrict space.

As soon as the Attacking Transition ( AT) occurs, and subsequently the BP or Ball Possession, the idea is to make the pitch as big as possible, to stretch the opposition.

So, the wingers staying wide was considered good practice. What would have been better was for the CBs to play to the the full backs, who then in turn could have played diagonal balls to the two screeners in midfield, through the creation of diagonal passing lanes. The screeners could have played the ball diagonally to the wingers.

Or the CBs could have played diagonal balls to the screeners. The 3 playing to the 8, or the 4 playing to the 6.

Then it would have been easier for the two wingers to receive the ball with the body shape favourable to playing forwards and having the whole field of play visible.

Edited by Decentric: 15/7/2013 09:41:53 PM

Good point.

However, it wasn't a question of being too static, but a case of Australian advanced players being unable to shake their markers. More fakes and dummy runs were needed by attacking players.

Spain are very good at rhythm changes.

Pain and Hoole stayed wide in AT and BP, because they had the chance to break the line, by beating their opponent with their first touch.

The other option was to cut inside and shorten the distance of passes, by moving towards the ball carriers as they receive the ball, playing a bounce pass, then turning and running around the outside of their opponent hoping for a quick one/two.

If you are reading this Kate, one thing I've done with passes, is to define a 'difficult' pass. This is a good pass that has one of four characteristics.

1. Made under close defensive pressure from an opponent/s.

2. A defence splitting pass.

3. An eye of the needle pass.

4. A new one, a 'killer pass'. This is a term used within FFA nomenclature for a pass that splits lines. It means a pass that takes a few players out of the game. It can be exemplified in a CB passing to a number 10, taking the opposition midfielders out of the game.
It is usually played on the deck.
The best one I've ever seen, live, was a state league game. A screener, or DM, received tan angled ball from a CB, then with two touches, played a diagonal ball forwards to the number 9, who timed a perfect run to play one touch and scored with the second. 5 touches for a goal from one end of the pitch to another, all played on the deck.

It also requires correct weight and correct ball rotation.

It seems funny but correct weight is no longer acknowledged or emphasised it is all about pegging it as fast as you can. As for rotation I have never heard it even mentioned by coaches up here. The emphasis is so much around the player who puts it in the net and not the team ability that gets it to him.

Is it the same in other zones do coaches still insist that the ball stop 2m past a player if he fails to touch it.And is the correct rotation no spin or a positive slight spin causing a turn of the ball in the direction of the run. Or am i just too old for this game?

I'm not sure we've had anything about this in Tassie.

Playing hard fast balls has been emphasised, in order to minimise the intercept. Also, that players have a competent enough first touch to receive those really hard hit balls.

I was up past your way recently, Krones, from Cairns upwards. I was surprised at the low profile football had in the print newspaper, compared to Tasmania. State league football is catching up on state league AFL for column space, which is amazing.

Also, even if you have a regressive coaching regime in your area, as you have seen, a replacement, like Peter De Roo, can change things for the better dramatically. A lot of old guys are being pressurised to change and adapt, or, forced out. The younger generation of coaches, certainly through FFA, are inculcated in more technical football.

We have quite a few blokes involved in rep football, SAP, association or national TDs, or state league, who are coaching at a similar level, or much, much higher than me.

It would be interesting to see what Possession Football, Gregory Parker, Andy Jackson, Brew, Forever Football, The Football God and Steelinho, think of Kate's aforementioned article.

I know these guys are casual visitors, apart from Andy, but it would be interesting to hear their insights.

Krones, if you are having doubts, one is never too old to acquire new knowledge.

I'm 56, but I'm constantly being inculcated in new football methodology. My only killer, is having to participate physically out on the pitch in coaching courses, as it kills me. 40% of the coaches in Australia are over 50 too. One participant was even 73! A bloke who used to be a coach educator.

In the C licence, it was really hard getting enough players out on the pitch, as about a third were over 50 too. I was told before the course we would have NTC players to work with most of the time, but we only had them for a few days.

Edited by Decentric: 16/7/2013 09:49:17 AM

Under de roo we where progressing forward but since he has left he old worms have all come out of the wood work. Even some nepotism has crept back in,(but it is not lasting) we are lucky to have the fury people

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=x0my5eTSg2o#at=555

teams 1 and 4 i the NPL not many killer passes lots of shots outside of the box

As a totally unfair comparison

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2x0b7cI_-4

Of course correct weight is still important, the fire and forget passing belongs to English style of abdicating responsibility of the passer.

Not up here

Try losing some weight, old boy.

Kids won't find you 'believable' from the dugout chumping on donuts.

Some of the kids I have trained in the past are at the Barcelona training center at the moment. They tell me they have spent Hours learning to pass and control the ball with the outside of the foot. When I did one of my coaches course i suggested passing and controlling with the outside of the foot as a legitimate way of using the ball I was dressed down by the TD and told it was only for futsal and never to be seen on a football field. Ill let you guess who the TD was. Now it was never going to change my mind but what of the rugby players who were trying to learn how to coach football?How much damage did that one TD do over the next 8yrs by passing on stupid information to naive coaches?

Edited by krones3: 17/7/2013 11:07:19 AM

You obey someone elses opinion to the letter?

[/shakeshead]

Hay what do you have to pick on me for i think have already made you aware of my opinions of you just stay in what ever burrow crawled out from.with your mates holmino paulpagsfc and wezza

Is there any coach, system, methodology, TD or governing body that you haven't criticised?

You lambasted the old, been disrespectful and untrusting of the new and taken a dig at everyone else in between.

Why the constant negativity?

Right around the soccer world millions of kids don't make the grade - primarily due to lack of talent.

1 yes I liked Peter de roo,like gareth edds and Ian banarto to name only a few.

2 I can not see how you can be a TD and not be able to play football or understand the game.

3 Local football needs a kick in the arse to help the kids out.I have watched these committees technical directors and self appointed gooses ruin it for years but i am soon going to change all of it.

4 That does not mean their football experience should not be enjoyably and no plagued by dickheads

Unlike you i do not just sit back and dig i do something I have for the last 8yrs and wait till next year. Time to sort this shit out. Now please just piss off.

Another aspect of passing stats that can prove useful is to do an options analysis. This looks at the movement and positioning of the team as a whole or, more in keeping with passing success stats, can be used to look at why the player is making the sort of passes he/she makes. Was there a choice for the CDM to give a defence splitter, or was the turn and pass back the only option. Is the player always playing safe when options are available, or conversely do they always try for the killer ball. It can be done at the relatively simple level of say, 50% pass backs when a forward option was available, or it can get as complex as a play by play breakdown of passing options with analysis of individuals predilections.

Another fun one for dribblers is to simply count the passing options open at the beginning of the dribble as opposed to the end. It is a nice simple measure of a dribble's effectiveness.

You are just trolling again, Chips.

Looks like you will be heading for a permanent ban on 442.

I think your third ban will be a permanent one with the IP address being black-banned too. The ignominy of an old age pensioner being banned.](*,)



Edited by Decentric: 17/7/2013 09:02:17 PM

X2

Edited by Decentric: 17/7/2013 08:56:32 PM

For me the best example of a killer pass is the 9 to the 10 or the 8 through the central defense into the 18yr box.

I think there is a discrepancy about the use of futsal as a development tool within the Australian system. I've been told the SA TD, is a Brazilian. Of course, he is passionate about futsal.

However, some of the FFA coaching staff over the country, particularly if they derive from one nameless country, don't see futsal as a useful learning tool at all.

If you had been down here, with our Skills Acquisition Progam trainer, in his role as coach educator, I'm pretty sure he would've endorsed what you've suggested, Krones.

Controlling the ball with the outside of the foot is an integral useful tool. It is also part of the shoulder feint/body swerve, which is useful as a 1v1 technique, to turn using a fake, and, to receive the ball, sometimes faking at the same time.

The TD who told you that is incompetent and should be sacked, if, he said what he said to you as you've written it above.](*,)

You bought a decentric mobile soccer skool franchise?

Good luck with it, mate.

He has been sacked, but how much damage has he done to the game?

A massive part of passing, is the ability of one's team-mates to create a diagonal passing lane.

So the player with the ball at feet, can pass to a team-mate's feet, who can move forwards or play forwards.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eX1QVRGvRkE

This is good

Good to hear he has been sacked.=d>

If poor operators hold key jobs, the whole organisation is blamed.

When FFA number 3, Rob Sherman, took part of the C Licence in Tasmania, he told all the participants that we were very lucky to have such a fantastic coach education team in this state. There are four of them, or three, now Kurt Reynolds has vacated the TD position.

Unless Rob was a professional actor, he meant what he said. Kurt, Mike Edwards and Anthony Alexander are excellent coach educators. Dean May does brilliant demonstration sessions.

After KNVB's Derkson and Schans, I was disappointed with what I had until exposure to these guys. A trained PE teacher, Edwards will soon be one of the best in Australia. Sherman is supposedly the best, but Edwards is already nearly as good. The selling point of the centralised course is better quality instructors, but we pay a third of the price to be trained by Edwards here in Regional courses.

Already, the V League has improved immeasurably from the old SPL and NPL, simply with ME being the principal coach educator, training most of the coaches in FFA Advanced Education.






Edited by Decentric: 17/7/2013 09:16:54 PM