That has been so predictable all night

We have better players all over the park.  I just don't understand the failure to harness that talent.

do you think this is the coaches fault for not tactically adjusting? the players fault for not problem solving on the pitch? Or something else

It would help to have two screeners instead of one.

So yes, it is the coach's fault.

Previously it was an edict from FFA that teams played with two screeners, certainly at under 15  level.

have a look at the youth coaches at rep level

okon finished way down the bottom of the a league. He got some of the most promising youth in the league and didnt really seem to add much value to them. Gumbou, Val, Ange and Arnie by contrast add a lot of value to youth players they have coached in the a league. Alistair edwards was ok at youth and a league level too he was a mid table coach. JVS is a mid table coach and has done better developing youth

unfortunately we have coaches that if they coached in the a league would do poorly

A second division fixes this because there are more tried and tested coaches to choose from rather than just giving the important role to someone the people in charge know

I can only see the ball properly on the closest side of the pitch.

that's what I thought

at seniors even if you have a bad coach though you would hope one of the 10s would drop back to create an extra passing option. Not sure how important it is for youth to know this

despite the tactical fail we have had the opportunities to win this

the thing is we need three times the opportunities to get the same number of shots on goals and twice the shots on goal to draw level with out finishing so dour

this is the first group to come through the ntc and there is a lot to be pleased about but questions need to be asked about why the ntc hasn't improved finishing and what can be done to fix this

true.

that should be a bread and butter finish there slide the ball past the keeper to the far post but nope

Well we are producing better players.  They were much better 1 v 1 than their opponents.
Using those players to their ability seems to be the missing portion of the puzzle.

yeah 10 a league clubs isn't a big enough pool to develop coaches

hopefully a 2nd division gets of the ground

Lets be honest, the reason Arnie "performed" is because of sydneys larger budget and there's barely any aussie youth in that side 

I think Okon did well with the Mariners with limited cattle. I think he did better with CCM than underage national team coach. Arguably, they should've beaten SFC twice.

They should  be much better this year with more time for Okon to build the squad. A lot of the older  under 23 national talent played for Jets and CCM. The other HAL teams probably rely more on imports  and older Aussie journeymen than young Aussie  players. 

The once great Albert Einstein said 'doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results' 

That has pretty been the description for our youth teams in the 5 years since I've been observing them, we never learn its pretty simple.

I guess we should not be surprised anymore, it's a regular occurrence to lose to these teams these days.

We are too predictable in how we play thats why 

Ironcally when the dutch coach was here and even under Okon we made world cup's playing with two 6s instead of the one holder and ever since we went to 4-1-2-3 our results have got worse.

Maybe our players are not that skilled in playing this system to the best of its ability 

At the moment our coaching is bordering on insanity.
For many years we have been doing the same thing over and over again and getting exactly the same result.
This team is the first dream team that have gone through the wonder dutch system ,from the start.But everything at national level looks the same as it ever was.same as it ever was.same as it ever was......Dumb dumb dumb.
You can't blame it on the kids.Each time they are different kids.They play the same each time and they get beaten the same way.INSANITY!.

Its not the same at all dude. these guys are technically miles ahead of the squads 5 years ago. The coaching however may be a different story 

This playing style is based on what successful powerhouses do.

It is harder to play - well. To play it well it is critical players maintain ball possession - and move effectively off the ball in possession. In some  instances this means 'checking' (shaking one's marker by  feinting one way, then running in  the opposite direction with some gained space).

Teams who play like Thailand and Vietnam do against us tend to have limited success at international level over a sustained period.
Van Gaal's AZ Alkmaar and Ajax tried to play the same way.

The same with recent Barca teams that  have adopted the Dutch school of football under the Cruyff influence. That is playing a high line, with the keeper used as a sweeper. The aim is to dominate possession.

Their recent school of thought in Holland is that in the past their players were better technically than their opposition. Recently there is a school of thought the Dutch have focused too much on whole team play as opposed to individual skill development.

Conversely, the Germans who borrowed heavily on the Dutch methodology in the early 2000s in revamping their curriculum, allocate half a player's time on the training track to working with the ball individually. 

This formation is known as the attacking midfield triangle version of the 4-3-3.

Ive seen some of our better coaches do brilliant things tactically. Kate cohen often has a good breakdown of their tactics

I don't expect brilliance from these coaches just basics. In the past I've seen us play a defensive triangle to teams parking the bus and an offensive triangle to teams with a pressing trap. 
If you face a team parking the bus you probably want to go to an offensive triangle or you will have 90% possession for limited chances. Alternatively you can play 3-4-3 with a midfield diamond like barca do which provides more numbers forward but gives you better cover for the counterattack. If a team is playing a pressing trap surrounding the 6 you can either play a defensive triangle to support the 6 and create the extra link or you can play a 4-4-2 narrow diamond midfield where you essentially play around their press trap with your fullbacks and your left and right mids provide the passing option back inside

in the recent past I've seen us play an offensive triangle against a pressing trap and a defensive triangle against teams parking the bus....

Perhaps I'm wrong on the basics but surely this isn't rocket science....

Prove it. What evidence to you have to make such a statement? There is absolutely nothing that points to this being even remotely true.

To play the Dutch Style and now to the German Style requires a high level of technical ability.
We just don't have that level of technical ability at the moment.
In my opinion the only environment that comes close is the Brisbane Roar Youth System.
Now that Ken Stead has left I don't know if the DNA (Do Not Alter) has changed though.

I often wonder what Ange could do if he had a group of players with high technical ability but poorly coached, like a Saudi Arabia or an Oman or a Japan.

To be fair Arthur the technical ability of the players were quite good, many times they are shown to play under tight pressure and many times they created a tonne of chances from this (pro-active play), but also if requires players to be tactical intelligent in their off the ball movement too against teams that are more disciplined, and i think it could be down to the coaching or level of education the players have been receiving.

In top level players are not only technically excellent but display high level of football IQ and tactical awareness.

That's a major problem with us, the youth teams rarely change tactics to fit the approach, that's why Gombau will be interesting observing as he's known to go even more aggressive with his tactics 

D its been an occurring for the last 5 years ive seen the youth teams plays, they have always struggled against teams that deliberately sit off and wait to go at us to make a mistake to go on the counter, we have made it too predictable with our movements and so now they have worked it out.
Once we lost forced or even unforced they just go at us on the counter, our CBs and full backs push up too high whilst the No.6 passing has to be pretty accurate when there is no movement from the two No.8s ahead of him too.

I've seen the same football problem for the last 5 years and nothing has changed. We never learn from our mistakes, its frustrating to say at least.

Playing dutch style,german style,barcelona style,Van Gaal Style?
What on earth are people talking about.None of these examples define robotic inflexible styles.
Styles are not based on bollards that stand in one spot and pass slowly from side to side and then through over loaded midfield defence with long distance straight passes to static receivers,leading to easy turnovers.
The style is only to play out from the back.The problem is our coaches can't work out how to adapt to different situations.Overloaded midfield defence?No problem play to the number six let him solve the problem .Dumb dumb.
Every problem has a solution,it's just inexperienced or incompetent coaches unable to find that solution or unable to pick the right players or communicate how to solve the problem.

Look at the speed of play out from the back for example.Snails could pass faster a lot of the time.
Speed of passing and player movement is important when getting through pressing defences.
Having more defensive players in your defensive half is great for attacking football.It's what you should want not fear.
The problem i see when i watch these games and even the Socceroos is there is no real plan to get through pressing defences.All that I see is a style most of the time.
Here is the plan...
Pass side to side wait for an opening....get pressed deeper...pass side to side....no opening...oops im in near the sideline amd in trouble...help me..risky pass time or send it long....That's not a plan to beat pressing defences.....

Example of a plan.....
Keep the ball central if you can. .... because this is where the most passing lines are ..just like in chess....attract a pressing defence ..have players moving to attract defenders and drag them out of position,make the defence go where you want them to go,by having players moving to drag those defenders to where you want them to go .Have players moving to receiving positions ready for when the pressing defence leaves a space.One touch passing to get through..
Pressing players love the ball going to the sidelines.It's easier to block off the reduced number of passing lanes.But equally when more pressers are there the options through the middle to play out are increased.
What i find amazing is that when it comes to corners or free kicks ,there is normally a plan.Players move all over the place to drag defenders one way(away from where the ball should go) and attacking players move to where they expect the ball will go.There are blockers.There are dummy plays.There are short passes before the long cross.There are all sorts of plays amd the reason for soing this is to create the scoring opportunity.
For some reason when it comes to playing out from the back,there's very little but the style template and solve the problem yourself.
Where are the set plays to play out?
There are so many things you can do.But all the time I see defenders with no proactive plan to play through the press.
Imagine in the attacking third if defenders started pressing attackers.Attackers would love this.They can use their skills to play through the defence.
Attackers want to attract defenders to wrong foot them.
Why ,when attackers press aren't coaches exploiting the opportunities?

But but we do better triangles. 

Heres a tip. If this game was all about technical skill then maybe this talk would be relevant. Put the ball in the back of the net. 

You are spot on Barca and let me tell you this will not change. Vidmar will continue to play this way regardless of who we play. Now is this a direct instruction from above...maybe. Do I agree...not sure. There are pros and cons for this. I guess that if its about winning then No, but if its about the education of the player preparing for later in there development.. well im not qualified enough to say that its not correct. Maybe D can help here.
I have no doubt that if we were to play these teams here in aus and modified the playing system we would smash them 9 time out of 10.