Thanks for all that spathi
I truly believe it is the selection process that has helped Queensland's ability to play this style of football.
For a long time the selection process in Queensland has been very wanting, finally Peter de roo has taken control. Along with the informed selectors at the various events around the state clearly they seem to have found a good formula.
=d> =d> =d> =d> =d> =d>

Humble pie anyone?

Just made some corrections.

Congrats to QAS. Worthy winners of the final, and as the week went on, their style of football got better and better. They struggled to score goals at times, despite their style, but it all came good in the final. I'm sure this has put a smile on your face, krones. :)

Agree that QAS and WA were the best teams in terms of the 4-3-3 system.



Edited by MidfieldMaestro: 9/12/2011 05:59:17 PM

Thanks for everything

No problem, happy to help out. :)

I would think this game is important for at least three reasons. Firstly it provides further encouragement to teams and coaches to adopt and persevere with the nationally approved development process by giving the team with the most technical points (QLD on this occasion) a further opportunity to show their stuff before some of the pre-eminent youth coaches etc in the country. Second it allows the organisers to "sense-check" the methodology behind this tournament by contrasting the best technical team against the strongest team and making sure the emphasis on technical development is also still making teams competitive. Thirdly, it gives selectors for higher level junior development programs another opportunity to see some of the stronger and better technical players - also one of the reasons for the final winner against the "all-stars" game. Judging by the fact QLD beat NSW in a canter in the final - mind you after losing against them that morning - the signs remain positive for the competitive element. The impact and level of play by some players (on both teams) were certainly worth consideration and - dare I say - appreciation.

Obviously at international level the bar is set higher still - your mistakes and injuries etc are increasingly likely to hurt you due to the generally higher level of competition. Good things take time and there will be set backs along the way. The "overnight" success of the Spanish team took decades to develop. Consistency is key - judging by this week we are building some fine young players. Hopefully a good number of these get the opportunity to partake in more quality coaching set-ups in the next few years. Considering that every team here played good football at different times and players overall looked much more comfortable on the ball than in previous years we appear to be heading in the right direction. Time will tell.

well said.

Always happy to temper the bollox with undisputed facts.

The rego numbers don't lie, krones.

But feel free to research the number of Sydney developed Socceroos v country NSW if it makes you feel better.

Edited by judy free: 10/12/2011 10:10:25 AM

Is that more about opportunity, finances, facilities,competing codes, accessibility to coaching, culture, level of competitive matches than talent? A tyranny of distance perhaps?

or just gross corruption maybe?

Yes to some of the above.

Why do you ask and what is it's relevance to SSG's?

You're now an expert on alleged sockah corruption in Sydney?

Don't spread yourself too thin, boss.

Nothing directly to do with SSG's, although I guess that is part of it, it was more to do with your comment about Sydney developed Socceroos v Country NSW.

question mark normally means a question is being asked not a statement of fact.
I think?
I do believe you would know more about corruption and those allegedly involved in it than me.[-x [-x [-x [-x [-x [-x [-x [-x

Edited by krones3: 10/12/2011 12:23:19 PM

I think the real positive to come out of the NTC challenge is how close all the states are. Some of the results did not reflect the actual flow of the games. NNSWIS started off with brilliant play to beat NSWIS 3-1, Tassie were sitting last and beat the team coming first being SASI. The real hard luck story must go to ACTAS though by losing 3 games 1-0 after completely dominating the games. Two of those games the goal was scored with virtually the last kick of the game and it was for an obscure penalty where the ACTAS player was fouled and the ref awarded the opposition a penalty. [-x

Edited by spathi: 10/12/2011 02:56:28 PM

Edited by spathi: 10/12/2011 10:38:51 PM

Allstars vs Winner
Any Results??

How old are the players playing in this torunament? and does anyone have a video link to this, i might be worth of a look if its possible?

Allstars 1 d QIS 1

The ages range from 13 to 16, as far as I know there are no video links

With regard to the above, 7-8 games are crammed into a short space of time which clearly means fitness must be an issue with the teams.

So are we really getting a true reflection of quality or is it somewhat distorted due to the scheduling?

In international competition we don't face teams that all play the same/similar way.

I know this is just one short tournament but I have to wonder if these kids are getting any exposure to situations which force them to solve different tactical problems?

I think in light of what we've seen recently at u17 & u20 level, this is another serious issue with the new Dutch direction.

When you talk about ball retention, was this mindless possession with no penetration like we saw under Versleijen or something more constructive?

Did many teams press high and what happened to the defences when they were put under pressure? Is this where most defensive lapses came from?

Also I know you said you haven't seen any truly dominant displays but did you see any flair players and/or kids who can put their foot on the ball and change the tempo of a game?

Okay fair enough but I would've thought we would've already known whether or not the technical team was competitive without needing a final.

Also as an aside, the awarding of bonus points is very subjective. It'd be interesting to know how many different people are involved in this grading as a number of the teams have had wild variations in bonus points from day to day.

Due to the scheduling, I don't think we are able to see a 100% accurate reflection of what the players can do, but I don't see any way to schedule around this. (I'm not making excuses for the players by the way.)

Strangely enough, on day 4 and day 5, NNSWIS were a different team than that of the previous 2 days and played more like the team which beat NSWIS 3-1 on the first morning.

Edited by slee45: 11/12/2011 03:54:32 PM

It has been good to see irregular posters Slee, Spathi, Midfield Maestro, Incoming, Mustard and F1 Dave posting in this thread.

Good comments guys.:)

Hope to see you blokes stick around and make more contributions in Performance.

It adds more depth to discussion and adds fresh perspectives.

There are supposedly 20 000 unique visitors to 442 each day. Most of them never post.

Congratulations to Qld....good win!!

Edited by slee45: 11/12/2011 11:10:20 PM

I know for a fact most of the players at this tournament play at a high level in their state/s and get exposed to different types of opposition on a regular basis. The Dutch system of development is just one way to improve the technical standards of our players - it happens to be a proven one. Did you notive the two countries at the top of the world rankings and in the World Cup final? They subscribed to it many many years ago. The recent "failures" - not really that bad in most games - just show how far we have to go. Give it time.

Unfortunately, there is an agenda from a few on here to refute the Dutch system in its entirety.

There are two issues.


1. Top European generic methodology compared to what we have had in the past in Australia.

2. KNVB curriculum compared to other top European practice - Clairefontaine, Coverciano, Barca Academy and new revised KNVB based German methodology.

As you say, Incoming, the first three place getters at the 2010 World Cup used Dutch based methodology. Some just don't seem to be able to accept it. It pervades the entire Australian football milieu.

When some coaches, including some former Socceroo coaches, speak of eclectic systems, they forget we have been experts in none in Australia.

What do you mean by mindless posession. The aim of every good team is to deny the opposition the ball. We conceded when we failed to do so against a couple of very good teams (in recent internationals). I think bringing players in from outside the development process at that age can be problematic. This will hopefully change with continued improvement here with our younger players.

Judging by the play and scores at this tournament the defences were placed under regular pressure (three attackers) and while a number of goals resulted from defensive lapses, most teams were able to play the ball out from the back regularly. There were almost no real blow-outs. Most teams tried very hard to penetrate with high-precentage passing - very difficult against well drilled defences. The players were obviously under instructions not to waste possesion by simply blasting it clear. While difficult, that is what this is all about as part of the development process.

As I said in previous posts we are not there yet, but the level of play at this tournament indicates to me that we are on the right path. There were a number of players who stood out for a variety or reasons. Most of them were appropriately selected for the all-stars team. A handful of them really strutted their stuff in the final and the all-stars game, especially the four QLD players selected, the NNSW left back I think it was number 5? who scored a cracker in the last game for the all-stars and a couple of NSW players (keeper?). Also the WA number 8. Did not get to see the Victorian number 10 play in that game unfortunately. Apologies to the other players involved, I no doubt missed things. To still be able to shine after a long and tiring tournament is however a good indicator of ability.