Even though the KNVB is one of four parent countries' curricula the FFA NC is supposedly based on, there are a few massive differences.


1. When it comes to technique acquisition, the Dutch KNVB believes a coach works on technically developing a player for life. That is, work on technique right up until their last training sessions at senior level, just before they retire. There is a lifelong aim for a coach to constantly try and improve a player's technique.


Conversely, FFA believe that once a player is past the Golden Age of learning, and possibly after 15, that a player is not going to get much better. I've had high level coaches suggest to me to stop trying to improve a 17 year old player's technique, as it as too late. They've said they are t payer they are going to be, and there is little one can do to improve their technique .


I studied another sport, karate from the age of 16 onwards. One constantly tries to improve one's technique.




2. The KNB also believes that when imparting technique, it is important to slow everything down in speed, in order to acquire good technique slowly and incrementally . As one becomes more proficient , one increases the speed. This is the same again in karate training I did.

Conversely, the FFA constantly talk about making everything realistic. That is, to constantly conduct technical practices at realistic, or game speed, without slow, incremental, improvement.




In both the aforementioned instances, I believe the KNVB are correct. I also believe FFA is wrong. It has also brought me into some lively debates at coaching courses with FFA coach educators.

I'm not sure which of the other parent federations, France, Spain or Germany, have influenced the FFA NC to dismiss technique development past the mid teens, or, make everything realistic in speed, when a player is learning a new skill, or trying to improve an old one?




Edited by Decentric: 16/8/2015 01:41:40 PM

This is true with every thing.

Also i think the curriculum says golden years and not only years just harder later.

Absolutely agree on both points. I have only played football at a level slightly beyond social, but every other sport I can think of continues to build technique post teenage years. Milligan and Wilkinson are prime examples of players who have continued to develop. I remember an article stating that when Korean coaches appraised Song, who played for the Jets in approx 2008 for a couple of seasons they were disappointed he hadn't technically grown during his time here, so Korean coaches obviously believe players develop after their teenage years too.

In terms of other sports, one look at the Australian cricket team over the years shows that players can continue to develop and improve weaknesses up until their 30's. I played basketball at state league level as a teenager and it is a sport with infinite parralels to football both in skill acquisition and team tactics. In the NBA it is more common than not that players are drafted as incomplete players and developed over time. Virtually every player will improve and develop their technical skills with the ball - shooting, dribbling, passing over the life of their career., through specific technique correction and then repetition to build muscle memory.

I agree with the concept of building skills and on the ball moves through progression, again virtually every sport does this. I'm bewildered than any sport wouldn't. One of my coaches, who had coached players who went on to play in the NBL (I was low level state league) described it in percentages . Start out by learning at 50% of game speed, then 70% then 100%. He would then tell us to try the move, eg a crossover or jab step and drive at 110% or 120%. By pushing the speed in training and repeating it you learn to perform faster and learn more control in an extreme situation . When brought back to game speed and put in a game scenario, I found my level of control and mastery over the ball had improved.

I was at a junior club with just parent volunteer coaches from U5-U13.

From U14-U16 I was at a rep team, but arguably the worst one in my area. The coaches of that team made us competitive, but in a very raw, old-football way. It wasn't pretty.

It wasn't until I was 16-17 that I started to get coached by actually technically-minded coaches, and it was then that my entire philosophy on how to play plus my personal technique began to flourish to what it is today.

I find even now, aged mid-20s, I have the confidence to try new things in practice and at 5aside and am constantly updating my technique, and it is always getting better.

Maybe nowadays, how there is a set coaching pathway etc there will be less kids to just not be given vital information like I barely received before I was 16, but there will still be some.

I find constantly practising your technique until you stop playing is extremely important.

At the end of the day it is good thing or bad thing we are not following the dutch with this direction?

It comes down to personal preference and how it fits with our vision when developing players, the FFA choose this way for a reason.

Would it mean they would be developing technically better players than ours given we introduced our new developmental system 5 years ago?

how our under 15s compare to the dutch at under 15 level no one knows this yet it would be interesting to see how would they develop when they get olden compared to the dutch and most european countries.

Han Berger did say 5 years ago our players have a similar technical ability to the dutch by age 12 but after that we fall behind considerably, is the work done in the later years or during the golden learning period?

Tom byer says in japan all or most of the technical work is taught and corrected from the ages 3-12 after that it's too late and they probably more technically advanced compared to Holland.

Interesting debate.

Edited by Barca4life: 17/8/2015 07:07:29 AM

we just need to let the curriculum run its course and then appraise what needs to be improved. But I can't help but be disappointed that technique isn't taught or improved later down the line.

Skill Intro - Learn the skill with little pressure, or none if needed.
Skill Training - Practice the skill he a game situation designed to bring up the relevant situations often.
Skill Game - Practice the skill in a broader context of the game, allowing the coach to see who gets it and who doesn't.

Raymond Verheijen in his state conference gave an example of learning to pass. How many players can't practice how passing with success in a 4v1 in a large area? Not only are they learning the technique but also the decision making. If they are struggling in that situation you could take them aside and focus on their technique alone but only then would you need to.