Somebody is getting touchy.

Something for you to read Kapow:

Also, Kapow, this is predicated on top European practice.

I think I've made a number of compelling points you cannot deconstruct. Kapow, if you are going to denigrate some football methodology, ,it might be a good idea to have a degree of insight into what you are criticizing. If I were you, I'd hesitate to pontificate.[-x

I'm just sitting back at this moment, waiting to see Kapow! answer this!

This has been one of the most interesting assertions I have seen regarding youth development from some-one on this forum.

Personally I'd like to see what Kapow actually sees as an ideal player development model because we must be missing something here.

Don't hold your breath, Arthur - he will use the "I don't reply to Benjamin's posts" approach.

Say it ain't so Benjamin?

You didn't provide any evidence to ''deconstruct' that for 9-12 yrs the key to the best players is coaching. That was the statement.

If it was commonly accepted you should be able to point to something. Eg. development rates of the best academies are far superior or the recruitment target age of the best clubs is 8 yrs old, so they can provide their 'worlds best coaching’ in the vital age range.

The reality is that good players come from all over with all different coaching systems and the best clubs, with the best coaches, who get the 'best' 9-12 yr olds, have dismal development rates.

Doesn't stop you trying for a reply tho lol. When by your own admission you're trying to 'annoy' or having 'fun' not responding to a point after discussing it seriously for 5+ posts, you're naturally going to get less consideration than other posters.

That's kinda been the point arth, world wide there is a weak correlation between best coaching practises and development [and certainly not in the 9-12yr old range].

For anyone to say there is an ideal system is talking shit lol. Clearly there are many intangibles to developing a good player.

Which is why when you have a centralised coaching, wages/fees, business models, as the game here is getting it's not necessarily a good thing.

You'd want to keep a very basic structure i.e. small side games and let the clubs experiment themselves.

The best thing the VPL can do is provide a structure for talent to be recruited earlier into the professional league [VPL age restriction] and get clubs involved with their local communities [zones and education].

Of course for the oldies like yourself, who haven't developed social circles outside of your club and thus the club provides an unnaturally high importance in your life, you find the above offensive fearing it will change something you currently enjoy as-it-is, without seeing the big picture lol

Got one ;)

In other words - a statement from the governing body of the game, based on the input of specialists brought in from Europe, means nothing to you.

kapow! just keeps digging himself deeper into a hole.

I'm not sure why he persists with his mode of 442 participation.

I'm not sure if Kapow realises he tries to pontificate about football to people heavily involved in football at a high level, even some who make a living out of it.

Yet he still seems to think he knows better.](*,)

With this thread topic, essentially I support a lot of what FFA does. But in this case in Victoria, FFV seems to be taking a different stance to NSW, if most Victorian constituent member clubs are asking for FFV to adopt the FFNSW model.



Edited by Decentric: 13/8/2013 11:45:28 PM

Claiming to be an expert is not a substitute for providing evidence to support a point.

In terms of evidence, do you agree that a FFA NC based on the top European countries, Spain, Holland, France and Germany, is not evidence that it is wise to focus on the development of 9-12 year olds in their optimum development phase?

Are these countries' football federations all wrong in their approach to developing football players at this age, being of paramount importance?

I have a degree in a profession which uses Donaldson and Piaget, two world renowned pedagogical educators, underpinning the methodology of the degree. Their theories of child development entirely support the core premise of the FFA NC being predicated on very sound football methodology. Yet you beg to differ.

Empirically, I have coached graduates of elite program footballers in a squad with other players who've not received the same methodologically sound coaching. The differential is vast in TIC - Technique, Insight and Communication.

The empirical findings of my training ground practice totally support the theoretical constructs of Germany, Spain, France and Holland,
(in football terms) and Donaldson and Piaget (in educational terms).

I am also a person who derives no income from football. It is others on this forum who are football professionals you take antithetical positions to.






Edited by Decentric: 14/8/2013 09:42:10 AM

lol i don't give a fuk what qualifications you have.

The point was not whether 9-12yrs is an important age group for the development of coordination/development, but whether coaching was the main difference maker to improve a player at that age - that was the claim.

If it was we'd expect the best clubs targeting players at 8 yrs of age and to have a vastly improved development record wouldn't we?

But there are so many intangibles not yet understood in the development of a player that it doesn't work out like that.

The FFA can take some guidelines based on what other countries do, those countries you mentioned have different systems but lets not assume there is an agreed base of the best way to develop a player either.

I just give up, its no longer worth the angst.

With the short distances in Europe, the national federations on the continent are constantly appraising what is occurring in neighbouring countries from professional exchange visits. With various football methodology I've asked you to expound on in this thread, there is a degree of convergence about how best to develop players in the European countries I've alluded to.

You havent responded. This is because you are not sure what you are talking about. The convergence is exemplified when Germany overhauled their coaching system about 10 years ago. Germany decided that Holland with only 16 million population was producing more quality players than Germany per capita head. They borrowed form the Dutch.

Kapow, from reading your posts, I'm convinced you would argue with Gerard Houllier and Arsene Wenger that they were wrong. Both these gents are professional pedagogues and successful professional coaches, but you would doubt the veracity of their opinions and practices, regarding football.](*,)

Houllier and Wenger - looks a little monoethnic to me. Oh why oh why couldn't you have picked a broad based selection if coaches..?

I didn't argue with the professional expertise, merely the results don't show a strong correlation between the best coaching and the best players, thus the statement that the only way to improve player development for 9-12 yr olds is via improving coaching is unfounded.

Of course there will be trends and innovations which will aim to increase the development rate, but at this stage it's a weak relationship.

You need another hobby other than attention seeking old man.

Irony alert.

-PB

:)

How about Hiddink and Pim Verbeek?

Holger Osieck?


They've all had teacher training or worked as teachers.

Attention seeking?](*,)

Arthur provides a lot of interesting links for other coaches to read on 442.

A lot of 442 members are pleased that Arthur posts so many thought provoking football articles.

I was trying to explain an elite practice with words on 442, which I find brilliant, and Arthur coincidentally posted a video for the same exercise. I'll be referring about 30 coaches to the same link. Expertise is being disseminated more widely through Arthur's decentric (the genuine context of the word) pursuits.

Conversely, your 442 involvement is essentially egocentric. You take a contrary view on most issues to gain attention. ](*,)

You miss the point Decentric - Arthur is Greek, and a South supporter, and therefore an enemy of football in the cloudy world of kapow!

lol.... anyway i took the opposite view because a statement was made that i didn't see any evidence to support, you provided your personal experiences which you believe in, fine, but as far as evidence goes worldwide there wasn't any provided. Nice chatting lol