Hey Chips, where SSGs utilised at all levels or were they restricted to the elite pathways?

Well that's not very helpful.

I'm guessing that some paid schmuck went out to schools, handed out some leaflets, had a 20 minute kickabout, packed his bags and moved on to the next school. Then at 3pm he returned to his office, wrote an email to some doofus manager on how he coached 300 kids that day.

Now, if you can manage to turn up any written evidence to the contrary then I would be happy to retract my view.




Edited by judy free: 6/5/2011 02:37:34 PM

I absolutely love the highlighted sentence above.

This about a player who won a ballon d'Or,real madrid paid millions of pounds for, with newcastle paying millions of pounds for later again.

Injuries particularly hamstrings IIRC curtailed his career but hey here's a know it all in tasmania providing an assessment that the guy is basically shit.

Too funny.

Jesus bud you backed yourself into a corner with this one.

Owen would still suit modern football in certain formations eg. big man, little man combinations where you are looking for a player running off. Not really the stuff beautiful football is made of but teams like fulham, bolton and even tottenham to a point still make good use of it.

Also consider the so called pinnacle of dutch football methodology, barcelona when they play with messi at the centre up front. He is not a big man and in fact is often used to a)take on his man or b)run beyond the defence. Its just a variation of 433.

I have no problem with australian football following a standard curriculum be it 442, 433, 451, doesnt really make a difference.

Supposedly 433 is renowned around the world as the best formation for developing players. Just hope i live long enough to see it bear fruit. What i will say is that at my age (25) i find many people of my age who have come through prior to the dutch take over can struggle to comprehend the formation and far too many coaches are attempting to fit square pegs in round holes because thats what the book says. I would suggest the 15 year olds of our current day will be able to comprehend and perform in the 433 once they get to my age.

Probably what im getting at with that last bit is that it is a failure of current day senior coaches that they are trying to follow a book as opposed to utilising the strengths of their current players and operating and adjusting formations in full game situations.

We also run the risk of having little to no variation in australian football if every coach plays 433. 433 focuses on having attacking footballers etc. Where in that case does it leave the national team when we come up against the likes of messi and they are constantly getting in behind? Have we developed more dfensive minded fullbacks?????

FWIW and from what ive seen and experienced 433 requires intelligent footballers and players who are students of the game. The standard jo blogs who doesnt understand it leaves way too many holes for my liking

Edited by stfa_striker: 6/5/2011 02:47:36 PM

All levels.

From babes just out of nappies to U8's.

FWIW I would agree that game day SSG's could have been stretched out for another year (U9's).

Cheers, mate. Do you expect we will see value from continuing the SSGs up to 12 years olds?

Only from viewing SSGs at various ages can I form my opinion, but there does seem to be a plateau in the kids development at about 10 in these - but 11 v 11 games at this age group also look a shambles.

Do you think that 11 v 11 from U10s is beneficial? I ask because the kids (probably as a result of coaching) end up either booting it or there is 1 or 2 players who seem to do everything in a game.

There are differences between Messi and Owen. I didn't list stature as a prerequisite for success as a striker.

Owen is essentially a goal poacher.

Messi is used to playing deeper and is a superb dribbler, able to beat players one on one running from deep. He is also more adept in combination play in the attacking third than Owen. Owen needs to play in a two forward system.

Many teams like to have players on the park who can adapt to a two striker or one striker system, at the point of attack without changing formation. Players like Van Persie and Rooney can change roles.

Edited by Decentric: 6/5/2011 03:59:20 PM

Surely your intent with that comment was refering to someone with height and strength?????

For every one messi in the world you are going to have a thousand owens. How in that case do you intend on making use of the thousand owens in your prefered formation????

Yeah, you well and truly fucked yourself here...
Thats my 2 cents
Carry on guys

I don't know precisely what you did on 4-3-3 in your FFA senior licence, but it can also be a very defensive system too.

I can show variations in detail in the KNVB thread in Performance over time in the next week.

One can have the flat midfield 4-3-3 as Barcelona did in 1996.

One can have the current preferred Dutch model with two defensive screeners in a midfield triangle. This safeguards against the modern phenomenon of effective accelerated attacks. This was manifest in the last European championships.

To make it more defensive again, the 4-2-3-1 can be utilised by moving the wingers further back. This can also present as a 3-3-3-1 by pushing a full back up to attack. It can be also changed to the defensive Christmas tree formation of a 4-3-2-1 by changing a midfielder from the attacking midfield line to the defensive midfield line.

To make it more attacking one can use the midfield triangle with one screener and two attacking midifelder scenario.

The midfield triangle with one screener can be converted to a 4-5-1 by pushing the two wingers further back in a line with the two attacking midfielders.

This attacking midfield triangle formation can also be adjusted by having a back four with a 3:1 system.

The back four can also manifest as a diamond. This can also look like a 3-4-3 in attack and a 3-4-2 -1 in defence.

There is also a cross over to the 4-4-2 diamond, or 4-3-1-2, which a few Dutch trained coaches like Baan, Arnold and occasionally Verbeek, eclectics, use the 4-4-2 diamond shaped midfield. The attacking three revert, with the central striker playing deeper and two forwards playing narrower.

So the 4-3-3 is a flexible system, offensively and defensively, even though any team under pressure can lose their shape.



Edited by Decentric: 6/5/2011 04:25:21 PM

I thought Michael Owen's lack of success in the "modern game" was down to age, weight and hamstring problems?;)

For those suggesting I'm wrong, you may well read the comments I'm making about Owen in contemporary football theory books. I'm sorry to sound patronising to STFA Striker and Davide 82, but you are blatantly wrong. Don't listen to ignorant forumites full of piss and wind.

Kevin Keegan was frustrated using Owen as a striker in the English national team for being too one dimensional. Owen was critical of Keegan trying to expand his repertoire.

When Owen left Madrid in 2005, no Champions League qualifier was prepared to sign him. He ended up at Newcastle because of this perceived lack of adaptability.

I dont have to read a book FFS to be able to rate Owen as a quality player at his peak and when fit.

hey dickhead you do realise manchester united went on to sign him.:d

Oh and i forgot to mention he went to newcastle on IIRC about 16mill pound transfer.

Edited by rabid: 6/5/2011 04:43:43 PM

Edited by rabid: 6/5/2011 04:44:05 PM

What I'm saying is you didn't see it within a structured framework.

How did you use it in an incremental and sequential build up to a full 11 a side context?

Why did you use what size SSG?

You operated in an ad hoc framework like every coach in Australia did before the new FFA curriculum of Berger/Baan. No fault of the coaches. They didn't have the right instruction or methodological base to work from.

Which coaches conceived the theory in NSW?

What methodological base did they use?

You would have to ask the Newcastle management whether they were abreast of contemporary football theory at the time.

Did they sign Owen for his name rather than his playing abilities within the framework of the evolving tactics of the era?

Owen wanted to go to another ECL club.

Why didn't they want him?

keep magnifying your foolishness.

You're doing a sterling job.

You know why owen didnt go to another ecl club at the time? Your mate wenger keep you in the loop on that one?

Why did he end up at man united?

You really are a silly old fool.

Would this have been the same kevin keegan that made Owen captain when he took over as manager at newcastle.

You idiot decentric.

Keegan signed him when Newcastle weren't a top side appearing in the ECL.

Keegan evaluated him in a different context than as English manager when he played against international teams.

Owen's limitations are available in football evolving tactical literature. Someone else who has had access to the same sources will substantiate what I've been positing about Owen.

Edited by Decentric: 6/5/2011 05:23:38 PM

His shortcomings are documented in evolving football tactical literature.

He is not the only player.

Edited by Decentric: 7/5/2011 11:29:04 AM

When Owen was signed at Manchester United, what was his role within that squad?

Was he a starter or a bench player?

He may have had spells as a striker with a partner, but he wasn't, and and hasn't been an integral component of the team.

The other night he was a sub for almost the second team when they played Schalke.

I'm not quite sure what Han Berger has to do with all this, but Owen was cited as a player with something in common with some Australian players, almost of yesteryear, within contemporaneous football. It was within the context of evaluating current young Australian footballers.

Berger has done wonders for football here, the only reason it wont produce a big talent pool is that Aus is using a rod and line to fish for players, whilst other countries are investing the money in factory trawlers.

Yeah.... we all get old, decentric.

Jesus H.

Up there with your best work, decentric.

Fucking speechless.

In my view U10's is the 'age' crossroads of SSG's.

It's the age where genuine talent is easily spotted, and these kids easily make the transition to 11 v 11 and benefits start to flow.

At lower levels I imagine it could prove a little more difficult.

Decentric, there are other dimensions to football beyond your narrow obsessions with tactical and coaching theory. There are personal, social, historical, anecdotal and just plain common sense dimensions which often explain and interpret events more adequately.

I can't believe you can't see this...

Congrats Decentric! Prior to this thread I thought JudyChips and RabidCrabs were just angry, negative, bitter, amti-HAL types, but you have single handedly shown them to be reasonable, calm and articulate multis with your drivel.... You could make Ljubo look like a mensa member in a debate.

Don't worry decentric it's been pretty informative for me and for others who want to learn more about the game unlike the trolls here who just want to ruin this whole thread, keep up the good info!

Edited by Barca4life: 7/5/2011 10:48:29 AM

I'll put these questions to you.

Have you attended any FFA two day sessions in the last few years for accredited coaches?

Did you attend the FIFA courses in Sydney for coaches?

Have you attended any Advanced (semi-professional, professional) coaching courses within the FFA framework?

Which books have you read about contemporary tactics, statistics and trends in modern football?

Have you attended any coaching coaches under European auspices/jurisdiction?

A lot of the stuff I've raised has been covered in these courses/books by Han Berger, Rob Baan, Alex Ferguson, Gerard Houllier, Sacchi, Rinus MIchaels, Valery Lobanovski, Arsene Wenger, Stefan Szymanski, Ad Derkson, Arie Schans, Jonathan Wilson, Simon Kuper, as well as one former Socceroo coach I speak to intermittently, and one current Asian team senior international coach.

If you want to believe two anonymous, recidivist trollers instead, who've done little of the above, and you are willing to stand by it, you have made a very courageous choice.

I read books on these thing too. They are immaterial to this discussion.

The subject of this thread was Han Berger's performance on TWG.

Common sense is a subjective concept which varies in any individual's interpretation of it.

What is perceived as common sense to Judy Free may not be common sense to Valery Lobanovski.

I once made a comment that I admired Harnwell's loyalty to Perth Glory. You seemed pleased I'd acknowledged it. That I'd observed and appreciated different phenomena to tactical and coaching theory.

I am a human being not an automaton. I enjoy the interpersonal interaction with other people at the football coal face. It is a reason I don't keep writing about match analyses and stats in the Aussie football media, as I prioritise coaching.

You may also note I'm willing to exchange coaching information on the interweb, unlike some others who see it as a competitive pursuit, and who actively discourage prospective coaches. I'm also sharing coaching methodology with a number of other coaches face to face.

Describe how Zinedine Zidane was implemented within the French World Cup winning team's system?

What were his shortcomings?

As his hypothetical coach, what sort of training ground plan would you use to improve his shortcomings if you can define what they were?

One Touch, note how the author of the above post will refuse to answer the question, and, how is this similar to Ljubo Milicevic?

This is relevant to this thread in that Han Berger is trying to increase the tactical/methodological awareness of Australian coaches and players.

The person the post is addressed to, is a proponent of the past coaching/training curriculum which he contends worked well in Sydney.