Thursday night 9.30 AEST yes there should be a stream.

Decentric Keep your analysis of the boys games coming always very interesting. Thanks.

No worries.

I'm aware that few parents of the boys playing now post on this forum. With these small computer screens as opposed to a larger TV screen, it can be difficult to differentiate the players, which is good.

If I make comments about observations of particular players who are identifiable, I try to keep them positive.

One parent on here had a son who played RM who had a very distinctive, and unorthodox running style for an athlete of his calibre. It made him easy to identify.

It is actually difficult to have access to these games if it weren't for this forum. As a coach who has sat through a lot of courses and presentations, it is interesting to see teams/players put this coaching methodology into practice against other teams who are not.

Thanks.

Great points i think i also recalled struggling against Thailand in the semi final whom they lost, but they did score 2 late goals.

We have seen it at the top level its quite difficult to break down these kind of defences when they so disciplined and tough to go through, we have also seen it with WSW winning the ACL this way.

Hopefully they have learned their lesson on how they could breakdown deep block defences and stop their counters too, he's hoping the coaches have been studying and look to solve this difficult football problem and of course up the players to execute it.

Edited by Barca4life: 20/7/2016 12:21:30 AM

At the Euros teams like Germany, Spain, Belgium (at times), Croatia and France (later in the tournament), took this type of football we are trying to play to a new level.

They are so good at keeping the ball, that opposing teams would wear themselves out, late in the game. It took the top reactive steam in the world , Italy, to beat Belgium and knock Spain out.

All teams with less possession, run more than teams who have more possession. It is far harder mentally and physically, for the other team to have the majority of possession.

If the Australia under 16s keep improving in maintaining possession like they did later in the game against Malaysia, teams like Vietnam will eventually lose concentration and tire, through fatigue, from not being able to get the ball much at all. They start making mistakes.

In some FFA conferences, former Socceroos have stated how exhausting it was playing some of the South American teams. They said if they lost the ball it was often 5 minutes before they won it back again. They desperately want us to be the team dominating possession, not nicking results, like we often did in the past.

This is the cornerstone for the FFA NC. That we want to be the team doing this, not being on the receiving end of it like we used to.

Decentric

Proactive and reactive football styles don't exist as binary categories.

It's far, far, far too simplistic (and reductive) to look at any given team and say they're proactive or reactive. Obviously a team such as Germany is overwhelmingly proactive. But a whole host of highly competent other teams played a kind of hybrid style between proactive and reactive.

France cannot be described as overly proactive, nor are they too reactive.

A side like Wales might be regarded as more reactive, but they weren't entirely reactive either (if you look at the work Bale, their wingers, etc. did).

One of the worst things that can happen is if people go about painting this proactive/reactive thing as a binary. It ain't that. It's more of a spectrum.

Any manager worth his salt looks at the weapons he's got and decides where on the spectrum to place his side. This is what Australia's management have really struggled with of late.

Mate, you realise you are contradicting the specific methodological terms used by the French, Spanish, German, Dutch, Belgian and Australian Football Federation Technical Departments, don't you?

One has to be careful to pontificate using what seem like generic terms to specific vernacular used in specific fields. In this case it is football.

At times teams may play a hybrid type of football during periods in games, to an extent, but when teams possess the ball, most powerhouses play, and are capable of playing proactive football.

Italy are the masters of capitalising on an opponent's mistakes. They have a very well devised national coaching methodology to do this to its best effect. They specialise in coaching teams to play effectively without the ball.

Their distancing, within and between the lines, and co-ordinated trypes of pressing, causes opponents to make mistakes they wouldn't against other teams. In terms of football vernacular this is called reactive football.


Most teams like to play proactive football, but it is difficult to play it without a degree of modification against better teams. It is still proactive football though.

The terms proactive and reactive may have different meanings in general life unrelated to football. Notwithstanding, in football they have specific meanings in terms of contemporary football methodology.


QF I've noted you pontificating a fair bit recently on football. This has occurred when you've debated with some other 442 posters who have a history of coaching/playing and have a knowledge of recent coach education in football, some at pro and semi-pro level ( NSL, NPL, rep coaching/playing). When I was overseas for a few months it was difficult to post on an Ipad, but I observed a fair bit of 442 discussion.

They've expressed of great deal of frustration with you because you miss certain points that are only apparent to those who've been on the training track. I'm not going to say who they are, because I'm not sure what they've publicly disclosed regarding their football backgrounds.

You've also been confident enough to cast aspersions about a number of facets of a national team football coach, Ange, who is probably coaching a national team to play to a higher level than the individual parts of the team. Nobody is beyond criticism, but one has to question the football credentials of a constant critic who views a pretty successful football scenario, much more pessimistically.

Sometimes it is not a bad idea to just listen and observe, mate. I do this with you and others who have a much more profound knowledge in cricket from playing for longer at higher levels and having access to better coaching, including a very wise mate of yours who plays Sheffield Shield.:)

One decent point you've made is Wales' performance. I strongly advocate that English leagues are counterproductive for producing international success, with strong English origins myself.

In Wales' case, since they are not products of the new Welsh overhaul in their curriculum, they probably best exemplify players playing EPL, or even Championship and Lower league football having international success with a possible Golden Generation. This is a point made by another 442 poster. It is a good one. The Welsh scenario may be the case with Iceland too.

Although malaysia was pretty poor some of those finishes were quite good, Roberts looks like a player for the future.. i think overall technically this is best gen ive seen so far lots of players taking on their man 1v1 dont see that alot in aussie football.

I thought about this the other day but I would not have have said this about australian youth players 5 or even 10 years ago based on technical improvements ive seen, maybe the new development system is coming to affect?

They still have things to improve on but very encouraging signs for the future.

Edited by Barca4life: 20/7/2016 09:20:12 AM

I think you are still struggling to get your head around it.

Lets try and explain it this way, clubs or countries in this instance have 3 real choices;

A coach centered plan where the coach is appointed who has his own philosophy on how the game should be played and if he isnt successful you get rid and bring in someone with new ideas. Man utd.

An owner model where the owner decides what happens and the coach follows the owners wishes. Chelsea

A club/country model where the philosophy is predetermined and the coach develops or finds the players to fit the playing style. Barcelona.

We in Australia have a country model with a clear vision of how we want the game to be played in all of the main moments, the coaches role is to bring that vision to reality not to change it.

This why we have a national curriculum in the belief that we can develop players and coaches that fit the mold , understand the vision and can bring it to life.

Now as this process is only 7 or so years old the 1st of those players are now around 19 so any thought of changing what we are doing will not happen for 10 years at the earliest.

You dont have to agree with it but hopefully now you will have a better understanding of the who, what, why, where, when and how.

did you see last year?

Decentric:
Against better teams including the last u17 world cup I notice that opposition teams are far more effective in creating overloads than our teams.
Some of this is unavoidable, if you have a slow build up in a possession based game you are going to have a few players play against a block of 8, fair enough. But this seems to happen all over the pitch sometimes even in the build up from deep. Is this something we care about at u17 level? If we don't teach off the ball organization and tactics much to make more room for technical development fair enough but I was wondering if this was a sign of a weakness in our current u17 coach?

Decentric:
Regarding quickflik you seem a little harsh. He's been strong in his opinions but it is a recreational forum

The tactics are being coached, albeit with lower weighting than technical play from ages 13 -17.

However, tactics can be learnt at any age effectively, much more than individual and team technical play.

The biggest onus is coaching technical qualities in the young stages, because they are more difficult to acquire in adulthood.

Off the ball tactics, such as pressing, squeezing, communication, specific transitional play and general defensive organisation are easier to coach compared to technique and skill as one ages, even in adulthood.

You've seen many senior Aussie footballers, technically products of the older ad hoc system, improve their game sense and communication immeasurably as adults in senior national teams and the HAL in the last three years . At the same time, their technical play is improving comparatively slowly.

Technical qualities - 1v1s in defending and attacking, first touch, running with the ball and striking the ball, need to be acquired at a younger age.

The team in possession of the ball is also the hardest part of football to coach. I can see great improvement in these young Aussie teams in possession, but at the same time 1v1 defensive qualities have been neglected and overlooked by Berger's tenure.

Old time footballers in Oz have been well coached, by British and other coaches, in heading the ball, tackling, physicality, receiving and passing over distance such as switching the play, and having effective body shape in a few aspects of football.

However they have been coached inadequately on the ball in 1v1 attacking skills, first touch in limited time and space, running with the ball, passing and moving build up play, body shape in a diversity of scenarios, communication, game sense and sophisticated tactics.

At some stage, unless a team is the best in the world, what they do will break down against opponents at a higher level. There were many good teams in the Euro champs who were unlucky to have tough draws and were knocked out by a tough opponent.

In terms of overloads, which I'm assuming you mean overlapping on the wings, and /or multiple players opening passing lanes for players on the ball, Australia has improved out of sight in the progression of games I've seen - Vietnam, Singapore, Philipines and Malaysia.

The hard to play well, short passing and moving game is starting to work much better, albeit having the opportunity to play teams weaker than Vietnam.

As time goes on Vietnam, will have more trouble breaking down the Aussie under 16s play when they are about 20 years old. Vietnam will have to spend longer periods without the ball and become more fatigued as Australia becomes more proficient in ball circulation, if Vietnam set up to play reactive football against Australia.

If they are under French Clairefontaine style coaching, they will surely learn to play proactive football like Australia is though.

The other big issue is that many developing countries, in order to justify their development programs, are prone to overage cheating. Sometimes players don't even have birth records in some countries, so their age is unknown. This issue has been rammed down our throats at FFA conferences.

In addition, many underage champions fizzle out as they become adults from all countries. Fast maturers are greatly advantaged in underage football, but eventually everybody develops into an adult. Physical qualities become more even in adulthood.

It is another reason that many stars of underage tournaments fade out as adults. None of us know how old some of our opponents are in football. As adults, it doesn't matter.

In terms or Tony Vidmar, his team has played some good football in hot and humid conditions which favour all the opposition teams who live in those climates.

I'd like to see us playing abroad, because there is a distinct possibility we could pay a lot better in Australia in cooler conditions, but the under 16s could become complacent.

These are the sorts of scenarios English players rarely encounter in their development. Another poster put up the results of the English senior teams playing football outside Europe over the last 10 years. Their results were abysmal.

Also the very talented current Belgian team were also , by their own lofty European standards, abysmal in the Brazil World Cup.

This toughening up process, creates the preconditions for more adaptable and mentally tougher national team senior Aussie players. This is opposed to what many former pros in England are calling their pampered mega rich prima dona footballers who underperform under pressure in international football.

Just in Singapore a few weeks ago, after experiencing a Southern European early summer, the conditions Australian teams play in in most of Asia can be very, very tough.

If one looked at Ange's coaching record before the Asian Cup, where he payed many good teams in Europe, or mediocre teams in Asian heat, the results looked awful. He was toughening the team up for the Asian Cup. It worked.

Far more talented European teams don't have this toughening g up process Australia does playing underage international football. Our teams and players are being trained to play in tough conditions away from home. This can only benefit our players football education.

by overloads I mean creating a numerical advantage in different areas of the pitch by opening up passing lanes in attack or closing them in defense.

That's fine if its taught mostly at senior level. I was just curious about the philosophy

QF probably doesn't realise it, but he has taken a lot of contrary points to people who have a pretty decent football pedigree.

QF knows I like him. He provides a lot of excellent counterpoints in discussion. QF is a very intelligent and literate fellow. He also debates points well without attacking people personally. Good on him. I appreciate his input on 442.

I've advanced his credentials as a mod to KA.

If QF reads this I hope he will see my criticisms as coming from a mate, not an adversary.

At the same QF needs to acknowledge that his experiences in football can seem naive to some people. They may lack his dialectical skills, but they've been active in the game for a long time.

There are many of these characters on this forum. Initially I may disagree with them, but they provide plausible rationale for the positions they hold.

Sometimes QF may not be providing the level of respect through his intellectual rigour, probably inadvertently, they think they deserve.

In possession the overloads are a big part of junior and youth coaching.

Most of my coaching at this age level has been playing from the back of the pitch to the front, through payers working in triangles and diamonds, opening diagonal passing lanes, and being proactive in opening an optimum passing lane for the player about to receive the ball.

This has improved in the under 16s as the tournament has progressed.

The problem was against Vietnam they were not able to do this as affectively because their off the ball pressure afforded less time and space on the ball than they were comfortable with.

At time the under 16s have also mishit passes, under little pressure. This is very common in this age group.

One other point I have made, is that the under 16s have been more clinical around goal in their last three games.

I don't know if Vidmar has been given this greater weighting in training, or he has devised programs for players to do a lot more of it, or it is just fortuitous for a few games, I'm not sure.

Off the ball defensive coaching is easier to do at later ages. It is also pretty boring for players and best used when players are mature.

All good D. I for one am happy to here your opinion good or bad. Constructive criticism is always a good thing.

This time may have changed. On my details its 9.30 AEST 6.30 their time but on wiki its 6.30 AEST 3.30 their time. I will try to confirm.

They did change the last game at the last minute, did they not?

Not according to my info it was always 9.30 AEST. This next one has been so need to confirm.

CONFIRMED 6.30pm AEST good luck to the boys.

Do they provide live stream through that youtube channel asean sport?

So we've got a day game? There goes our chances of playing a pressing game. Thailand will be very hard to beat under the sun in those conditions.

YES

Thank you sir

Yeh it will be. Funny have they have Cambodia playing at 6.30 when they shouldn't have been.

Decentric

Shall write a reply properly when I get home from work as it will take a bit longer. For now suffice it to say no offence taken, all good

And both Thailand and Cambodia played one less game then us. :-k