Not sure if you have read the NC, but 5-9 is "discovery phase" is about kids having fun and not coaching, U9 to U12/13 is skills acquisition so that means the youngest of the first batch is now U17. 

Easiest way to directly compare the NC impact versus previous generations is to look at performance of the Joeys squads and these are easy enough to find, but if the NC was superior to previous methods then surely results should be better, unfortunately they are not. 

There will be boneheads on here that will sprout crap about under age results not mattering, its all about the development, yadda yadda, but that is just BS by politically correct "every ones a winner and gets a ribbon" arm chair experts, but anyone who has any real experience with football with tell you, strong juniors lead to strong seniors. 

The below interview with Matt Crocker who is the English FA’s Head of development is really interesting, particularly in light of their recent success.

 https://www.socceramerica.com/publications/article/74879/england-youth-on-the-rise-the-fas-matt-crocker-o.html

A very good summary Barca typically.
Lets watch what the current U16's and those coming after them regards their state of play.
Have to say even watching current U18's in PL3 some skill and BPO etc is good to watch for they have been watching the current global Fav players for sometime and mimmick them.

I'm sorry for the current Gen of our Roos and we all know they put in their 110% but they just are not good enough barring a few exceptions. The expectations are so high especially when involved in a World Cup - just look at these last few R16 games compared to our current abilities.
Foz and the likes can say all they like BUT we don't have the ability/standard they bark on about - we got to face and accept this not matter the systems they were in.
I don't think it fair to bag the past/NSL or SA etcetc, yes they did it their way and not as a whole focus together in training philosophies etc lets stand back and be fair on it for there wasn't unity.
To bring up 26yrs of never qualifying FFS we were part timers and in a worse position/standing than we are today regards to support/media etcetc....like get real.
There is good and bad then as there is now just as people commenting from the past and those today.
As mentioned there is a couple of good points made by Smith - so because he's from the past he's talking shit, talk about ignorance more so.......
No matter the system there will be constant challengers from outside inside - to counter this most times whats needed ending up being a formidable Squad is that Gen mix of varying qualities combined that "ticks" the box's.
Then it will be quoted what a great system or this or that - NO, its the timing that all these kids were born within a few years of each other that they were born with that "IT" factor more than anything else. 

I only recall Pim thinking/saying our local league was rubbish.

I logged in, saw this thread and immediately guessed how many times Decentric would have posted already. :)

Decentric, you're a teacher by trade. You firmly believe in systems, structures and curricula. I get it. Its what's kept you employed for decades.

As our football world here in Australia moved into this paradigm post 2004 it gave you an opportunity to move your skills into this area. I get it.

But here's the thing some of us know.............. It doesn't work. Not in school and not in football.

It creates obediant, compliant mindless drones. Perfect for a society focused on law and order but no good in football.

It stifles creativity. It stifles "out of the box" lateral thinking which in society so threatens the "order". We've lost a generation of players, coaches and administrators thrown out as being not compliant.

Someone not touched by this disease like Arzani turns up and everyone things he's a revelation. He's not as I've seen countless others. Somehow someone made it though without being "educated". Clipboard holders are perplexed. Cahill is another who doesn't subscribe. These players didn't come from structured football. If you think you're going to make a Persian and a Samoan bend to your will good luck with that. But 100% freestyle doesn't work either.

It requires work to harness the energy and potential of a talented player. Hard Work. It requires special people who are flexible. Man-managers of the highest calibre. They don't exist in the teaching world. The incompetent will bring out the coaching manual or the teaching curricular and beat every round peg into a square hole. If it doesn't fit, throw it out or send it to the principals' office. It makes life very easy for those employed. Potential sacrificed. Its no wonder teachers need a union.

The paradigm you believe in is slowly unravelling. Its been exposed. Dog whistling "32 year no WC" to keep everyone in line hopefully will have no effect. I look forward to some change. Ron Smith knows more than most in the local game. Some like him, others are threatened. He's now seen both sides, pre-2004 and post 2004. He's worth listening to.

The last straw in maintaining the adhoc, unstructured systems we had was helped by Farina who put the nail in that coffin. It firmly highlighted we needed good disciplined systems to be learnt, not from necessarily from the mega footballing nations who get there by default but by smaller ones whom are more aligned with our population size. The Dutch fitted the bill and we've been better for it.

Now just imagine Farina taking in charge of the NT. Arnold was not much better but he has learnt a tremendous lot.

Farina didn't want to do it. $70k. It was a favour in very hard times due to David Hill earlier incompetence. You don't know what you're talking about.

I guess it comes down to the mentality of the coach. Do they take on what they learn from books and their experiences, or simply follow the book?? From my personal experience very few follow the book. It simply provides the tools with which to succeed, but as with any job you need to know how to use those tools and which tools are best for the job. This is something that can't be taught by the FFA (or others), but is taught by experience (the best lesson is your last mistake).

Creative players are established through pick up games and SSG (or kids practising for hours in their backyard). SSG should now be the stable diet of any training session from u6's to masters ... no excuse. The length of the season is a problem, as are unstructured / organised pick up games (that is a fact of our society more so than anything FFA or football did). The thing is you can't "teach" someone to be creative, you need to give them the opportunity ... this is why I like a 4-3-3 formation, as it gives plenty of incentive for mids to be creative, wingers to take a man on and strikers to make the most of their opportunities. Of course you need the personnel or recruit the personnel if at a higher level.

I'm struggling to understand what you are talking about? What part(s) of the new curriculum do you find too structured?

You realise most of the coaches still in NPL football are from the old school? 

I'm not sure how creating a common structure for your team to play as a unit is restricting individuals. A structure (if done properly) helps players get the best out of each other and in turn allows the individual to shine. I had a player who played rep football for the first time when he was 17 and he is now playing for Central Coast Mariners' NPL and NYL side. He was a fantastic individual who needed some guidance in how to play with and for the team.

Before players get to senior football, players need to develop technically which is what SAP is for. But SAP is not enough - parents and the kids need to spend a lot of hours on their own if they want to make it as a professional. Its not just the system.

Sorry to burst the bubble of some on here who think Daniel Arzani was just plucked out of obscurity from some back street, but he actually trained under Tony Vidmar at the COE for two years using the theories espoused in the national curriculum.

Anyone who thinks Arzani did not spend a minute under the influence of the National Curriculum has no idea what they are talking about and clearly out of their depth.

 

Odd, can't A-League youth team players play in the NPL during the winter , I thought they did ?

From my experience the coaches as high as state TDs are still finetuning how the curriculum is actually delivered. Coaches are certainly not sure and in some cases what coaches are being asked to do changes within a 12 month period. For example we were told at our first meeting with the head body that all teams under 13 to 15 must do game training sessions that followed a very strict structure of passing practice, positioning game (small sided game basically) game training and training game. There was no room for specific skill based training like 1v1s, shooting, crossing etc, This was all to be learned and mastered in the SAP. I was personally horrified but that was to be and we would be audited on its implementation.  Over the next few years this stance softened as the TD who was  a coach in the old system developed a less and less literal understanding of how the curriculum was to function. The other thing that was slavishly adhered to was guided discovery as the pedagogical approach. Ron Smith is particularly critical of this and I agree with him. At the outset it was almost like throw them a ball give them a task and they will just learn it by working it out themselves. Coach interventions were very much discouraged and when you did stop the activity and step in you gave another task and hoped they work it out. The theory is let them play let them make decisions. I do believe the things you learn the deepest in life are the things you grapple with and master independently. However Ron Smith is right that there needs to be room for the coach to come in and explicitly teach skills and decision making. In my opinion there needs to be a blend of guided discovery and explicit teaching and definitely scope in training players over 13 in explicit skill based activities both isolated and with game resistance. Good coaches have been doing this for 50 years here.

Bottom line is that if you are waiting for the first bunch of 6 and 7 year olds to come all the way through the system to judge whether the curriculum works or not then you are being too hasty. A national curriculum is a good idea and we should hang firm and stay committed because coaches are getting better and better in understanding how it is supposed to be delivered. There are some pretty amazing 12 and 13 year olds running around in my neck of the woods and they are not robots.

AIS can talk, they turned away Tommy Rogic because he didnt conforn to the generic style.

With 1v1, shooting, crossing, etc that can be incorporated into passing prac or positioning game. I do a lot of that stuff in passing prac.

There is a teaching process when coaches observe and intervene. I'm not sure where you got the idea for that being discouraged came from. 

Lol, this hasnt worked with englands junior females . u17 recently lost 8-0 to germany.

Someone doesn’t know how successful English youth teams have been recently 😂😂😂😂

Lol, wish our U17's made the Quarter Finals like the U17 English Girls did at last world cup in 2016. Shit I'd be happy if ANY of our junior teams just made it to a junior world cup full stop!

@ALF are we really going to judge the last u16 Joeys team based on a result in Asia? or are we really going to judge the players such as Lachlan Brook, Ramy Najjarine and John Roberts that played in that team to see if they will be playing in the a-league and hopefully beyond in the Socceroos in the few years instead?

That’s the thing with youth development it’s the ultimate result of what the players could do at the top level, that’s how you judge success not from a nice youth result, do they help yes? But it doesn’t always mean those players when they get older as a lot of factors come into play when they reach senior level.

Just some throughts on that u16 AFC tournament in 2016,

1) it was a very AIS based squad and only had 4 players outside of the AIS squad
2) with that group a lot of players have joined a-league or overseas based clubs and so the AIS did not have the best talent like it used to have and so coaches who weee also head coaches of that Joeys team refused to look at more non AIS players
3) And it was poorly prepared team with the rumours to go by

Not trying to make excuses because it was a poor effort given the talent that was there and not selected to for political reasons and it should have done much better buts it’s no surprise the AIS/FFA COE is now extinct as the current Joeys squad talent process is completely different so I’m prepared to judge this group more than the previous ones.

But most importantly let’s judge players when they get older? People want to judge a piece of paper without looking at the other factors is quite immature from the football community.

The biggest problem for me which is lost in translation is instead of blaming it on a piece of paper, should the coaches and TDs coaching should be asked instead and get feedback from them instead? How they coaching? is it being implemented properly? What is working and what could be improved on? Etc

Also you can have the best development curriculum in the world and the best grassroots system in the world it mean nothing if the first team opportunities at the top are so limited for players to be developed and break through as first teamers.

The lack of opportunities are so small in Australia we are seeing boys and try there luck overseas in the tough European market and we are missing out on developing more talent this is what separates the golden generation era to this....opportunity to play first team football!
This an occurrence in the a-league era where youth development has been put on the back burner compared to the NSL era for all its problems it had a good structure and youth development was encouraged.

It also doesn’t help that the current youth league isn’t what it used to be, although a national 2nd division could be a potential game changer in that regard.
But the problems are not a piece of paper it’s not that deep as people make it out to be.

Also people talk about doing well at youth level there are a few things that have to happen,

1) a strong group of players in that age group
2) a good coach and preparation to boot
3) development system to help them come through
4) luck of draw in the group
5) football moments in the games
6) level of football (we are competing in Asia and not the much easier level in Oceania) whilst England play in the strongest concede in the world

But should you judge the players only on that or should judge a player if he’s playing first team and hopefully for the Socceroos in the future? People are too impatient for results and it’s reflective in society but when it comes to investment in people it takes time and you would not see the results in some cases years.

@Barca all people keep doing is making excuses for the current state of youth development, the NC hasn't had time, the best players weren't picked, wait till they grow up, yadda, yadda, yadda. 

Your comment about Oceania is naive as you can easily compare performance by looking at U17 WC's which arent affected by the different confederations. In 1999 our U17's were runners up and in 2001 they made the quarters and by comparison our performance since 2005 has been poor with us making only 2 appearances & not participating in one (tournament is run every 2 years).

Obviously not all U17's "make it" and there were some notable players who didnt make the U17's squads (like Dukes) in the past but youth performance is a leading indicator of upcoming senior performance and the results in 99 and 01 are no surprise as this was the was the lead in to the GG. 

Plus are you seriously saying that we should be happy that at the 2016 AFC U16's championship where we lost to powerhouses Kyrgystan and Vietnam? That they are much tougher opponents than what was faced in Oceania? 

Personally I dont believe the NC is the biggest issue facing youth development, it is the lack of opportunities with the HAL franchise system  and this is what needs to be fixed most urgently. 

I started playing in the mid 1960's..so I qualify as a dinosaur
....the one big difference between now and back then is that when I came home from school every day I kicked a football around the back yard by myself or with friends till it was too dark to see . I then went to structured football training with my club , school and rep teams and I was playing up to three games a week.
I had a ball at my feet every single day and for many hours a day (even walking around the house)  .
Some was at training, some was in games and some was me v the trees in my back yard.
It didn't turn me into a superstar but I was typical of many kids back then.
This was where the Vidukas,Kewells  etc came from.....a world where football was King to us and there were relatively few other distractions.

Kids get home now and lie on a couch and play FIFA.Then they may go to training one or two times a week and play a game once per week .
It is not enough time on the ball ...simple as that .
Kids now don't spend the time with the ball that players of earlier generations did...and it shows .
This is our biggest challenge ...you can have any coaching systems you want ...but skills and feel for the ball only comes with having that thing at your feet....a lot.

@AJF I’m hardly not saying we should be happy by no means we should not except this and we can do better at youth level but does it mean the NC is not working based on that or how the players would go when they get older at senior level instead? That’s the point I’m trying to make from my last one.

You talk about being in Oceania was naive? It’s a fact, if the current Joeys and young Socceroos played in Oceania also they would also qualify so this is a daft point but Asia is another level up and with these countries invest in a lot in youth development it does not come as a surprise to me.

The last time the young Socceroos won a game at a World Cup was in 2001, well before the a-league began.

But the Joeys in the new era both made second round matches abit losing 4-0 and 6-0 both times but it’s better than nothing I guess and is something we have to improve on.

At least you admit the Curriculum is not the problem that’s what I’m making, the lack of the opportunities is the biggest problem out of them all which is hurting th chances of the Socceroos right now and this is far more important than anything else in the youth development space.

 

Of the under 17s who play at World Cups, many don't even become senior football pros. 

For some reason some players peak early and fade out.

Even when I've coached under 12 and under 14 rep teams that feed into state rep teams, the fade out is high to senior level. Unexpected kids often make it to senior NPL level. Precocious stars often fade out. Particularly ones with with big egos and who think they know it all.

The bloke does know what he is talking about.

He knows a lot more than you, Freaken.

He is a former NSL player - a comp you adulated.

Yes we all do but there is a place for some isolated repetitive practice.

I got the idea from raising the point and being discouraged,

i meant to say that this was at the beginning. In the years that followed in the demonstrations that followed the interventions became more encouraged and the information more explicit.

It is pretty obvious you know little about performance in football, Freaken.

You choose, as always, to avoid deconstructing or/and refuting football specific analysis to elucidate facets of the Socceroo performance in Russia.

Ron has highlighted one massive weakness, to wrongly claim every facet of play is failing, when it isn't, and, overall, we have improved immeasurably since we've adopted European powerhouse methodology. This is exemplified in 4 successive WC appearances, and Oz men and women winning Asian Cups. Remember 32 years of failure to qualify for a WC under ad hoc coaching methodology ?

It is one reason the NPL clubs have improved - including yours. They are applying contemporaneous  structural and tactical methodology. 

One of the facets of FFA coaching, is to adopt training ground practice depending on the identified football problems identified on a week by week basis, through a comprehensive pro forma. They are based on a team's weekly performances against opponents. 

Also, teaching requires different individual education plans formulated  to meet every students's individual needs.


Ron was angry he was sacked by FFA. He is pushing an agenda. If you've noticed lately, Rogic, De Silva and Amini have emerged, who can be defined as creative players in the attacking mid position we didn't have before in this quality, apart from possibly Troy Halpin. Scoring goals is currently a big problem, that needs a resolution,  but the defence has improved immeasurably as has possession and structure  in build ups.

The paradigm isn't unravelling. 32 years of failure  between 1974 and 2006 shows it is progressing.

a lot of kids think all they need is three sessions and a game a week in the npl to become a great player. they are doing so much less than when the vidukas and kewells were kids.

It seems to me that:

1) The AIS was a pretty good finishing/development school for our young players of the NSL generation.

2) That the AIS was axed by the FFA to save money.

3) Nothing equal or better has replaced the AIS as a finishing/development school for our talented young players. 


So what is the solution?? 

So according to your logic Farina's tactical incompetence was because he wasn't paid enough lol. You're a funny freaken fella!

If you are reading this, Freaken, Football Lover is also, like many others on 442, a semi-pro/pro FFA trained coach. He knows what he is talking about. Not like where you've spent most of your time on the internet, where many people spout gobbledygook.  Then when the same views which lack genuine football insight  are repeated enough,  they become an axiom for you and other Bitters.

LOL!