I'd like to get other posters opinion's on the following.

Please try and keep it civil and constructive rather than "your(sp!) an idiot". Genuinely interested in opinions of others with more experience than me.

SSF is good. In fact it is excellent.

My only beef with it is the FFA caved to parents and clubs and let the kids progress to a full field far too early.

In it's initial stages the kids weren't starting until a later age. (Under 13's I think). They now progress to a full field in under 12's so that you have 11 year old boys and girls on a 100m long pitch. Ridiculous.

If it were up to me I'd have 9 v 9 playing across a full field (with 5m x 2m goals) right up until the under 15's. (I believe they don't play full field in Spain until the under 16's.)

Can you imagine the close ball control and tight passing that would develop on a crowded small pitch with young men and young women going full belt? Long balls out of defence and speculative passes would be worthless in a game played on a pitch this size by virtue of the restrictions placed on the ground size. Because of less time and space on the ball the players would develop into much more composed, skilful, tactically aware, pass oriented, close ball control and dribbling footballers.

At the moment I think they progress to full field at under 12. Far too early. I referee under 14's occasionally (they haven't gone through the SSF system) and all they do is kick and chase. It's hopeless.

Just to clarify by across the field I mean each full pitch is split up into 2 fields and the games are played perpendicular to that of the main field.

I understand that playing on a small field would be detrimental to learning the 40m switch and the piercing through ball out of midfield but given the choice between developing that part of their game and the other (to me) more important parts I'd take the small field over the big field any day.

I've read that the Roar train 11 v 11 on a modified pitch that spans from the 18 yard to 18 yard box for the reasons listed above. If it's good enough for them then surely it's good enough for our kids.

Are parents to blame because in their minds they're not playing "real football" until they're on a full pitch? Was the FFA wrong in letting them progress too early to a full field?

Cheers.








Edited by munrubenmuz: 3/11/2011 02:46:09 PM

Agree totally mate. My 10 year old has been on the big field for one season now and its way too big. Its all just hoof and chase. The biggest problem I see is that they have so much space to use most passes end up being a big lump forward because they can't pass accurately at that age over that distance. The times they have been able to get them on the small field they have played quite well and their passing improved immensly.

Absolutely agree. At a minimum keep it to the original FFA proposal and have u10s playing 7 v 7 and u12s playing 9v9 across half a pitch. My son's team were u12this year and suddenly the best athletes were superstars regardless of their relative technique and insight. Ideally, go 5v5 Inc keeper from u8s and up on a futsal sided pitch until u 12s. Could even use a futsal ball. Only then go onto a half pitch.

Whats the reason the FFA have allowed the under 12s to go into a full pitch that early? whats behind this?

Because i read a decent article i think from henry winter regarding england youth development problems and they have a similar problem to us, i think Sir Trevor Brooking wants the FA to change the rules to not allow english kids to not play on a full pitch until when they reach the under 14 level, like what happens in spain, france and germany etc

My son has been playing on the half size field since under 8s and this year has been 9v9. My complaint has been the lack of consistancy in the field size and more importantly goal size during his season. We had a couple of Nil aal draws simply because the goals were too small.

I agree that half size fields to u12 would have been better,l especially in terms of primary shools ie (Seniors Yrs 5-6) would play half size with Juniors (Years 3-4) playing on the quarter size.

I think the change had more to do with FFA's view on competive games not starting till U12s bu the local assosiciation view of starting compititions at u10s on the half size field.

When Rob Baan was FFA TD he was keen on the Brazilian model. They play 5v5, with keepers, until 13 years old. Then they start 11 v11.

Tassie's head of futsal, recently recruited by MIddlesbrough Futsal Club, publicly stated that futsal players (5v5) receive 6 times as many touches as outdoor players in the average game.

In Holland they did play 11 v 11 at 10 and 11 years of age, but it was being reviewed.

This problem recurs over and over.

It is often the adults who want kids to play 11 v 11.](*,)

agree
i would like corners introduced in U8s to stop poor coaches from telling kids to kick it over their own back line.

All that needs is a rule like hockey where putting the ball deliberately dead is a penalty corner (or in this case a corner). Although it brings in the referees subjective opinion, it really doesn't matter to much, and should hopefully stop the coaching of it.

I would just like to see more investment in Futsal all round. As far as I'm concerned SSF = Futsal.
If anyone has seen how junior basketball operates, futsal is a vehicle that can emulate it and drive the participation numbers. While for younger children and parents with less Football knowledge and background it is less intimidating, goes double for girls. It can played all year round to, while many schools now have their own indoor stadiums which lends to scholl participation to rival a program like Auskick.

Beauty this thread has finally kicked off. I'm reading all these contributions with interest. Keep them coming.

Up here in Brisbane in under 8's SSF we play corners. It's actually in the rules which are here. (Page 4.) http://www.smallsidedfootball.com.au/pdfs/2011/ossf_football_laws.pdf. Download these and show them to your referees.

In the under 8's/9's there are corner kicks if the ball touches a defender last and goes over the goal line.


Edited by munrubenmuz: 8/11/2011 09:50:02 AM

I'm no expert but I would have thought the transitional model we have now would be better than jumping in one year from 5 to 11 players.

I think the way the FFA are doing it now with the transition between bigger pitched and more players as you get older is good they just need to wait before putting the kids onto the full pitch, if not at under 15's, at least under 13's.

I know when SSF was introduced in Brisbane the clubs lost a lot of players to the church leagues because they kept GK's and bigger fields because parents thought they weren't playing "real" football unless they had GK's and were on a larger pitch.

I suspect the FFA buckled a little bit and we've lost an opportunity here. I'd like to hear more on the reasoning from the FFA for having them progress to full pitch at under 12 level.

Good topic for discussion, Manrubenmuz.=d>

Interesting thread - I'm involved in my local junior club so observing player development, community player development closely. Posted my thoughts on my blog - but thought hope it's okay to add them here.

http://nearpost.blogspot.com/2011/11/where-han-berger-and-i-disagree.html

Love Han Berger - love his work and what he's doing for the game in Australia but there are a couple of areas where he and the FFA Technical Group need to improve and could improve our players, all our players more quickly.

The revolution is on - for some, but very slowly in some areas.

In Canberra for example in clubland we are a long long way behind what constitutes technical development.

Check out your club, any club - how many coaches of boys and girls from 7-12 would you be really really confident they were improving your players? It's not a big list is it?

No criticism of club or coaches - we're all volunteers and it's not an easy gig to turn up each winter night never mind knowing what you are doing and looking ahead and being able to realise and assist where players could head.....in a technical sense.

Disagreement number 1:

Han Bergers often cites the point of coaches structuring training too much at this
age. 5-10 years.

All quotes are from this months 442 Magazine - go and buy it it's great!



Most players between 5-10 are only playing really when they are at training or playing a game in Australia. Sure some play at school in the yard - but many boys and girls come to clubland play their game and go home. Just "letting them play" improves nothing. Not in an African, Brazilian or an Aussie.

"Let them play" is great if you run outside after school and play, play in school and before school. Play on the weekends etc.

How many kids do you know in Australia who do that? And indeed there are many talented potential players who will never develop between 5-10 if they are not at least shown how to kick the ball - instep control doesnt come naturally to most kids - just come down to my club and watch the kids who we "just let play."

Once a week training - once a Saturday. For 16 weeks. Not enough is it Han?

Disagreement No. 2: Agree with Han - disagree with Capital Football on this one.


Take a look at what Han says and take a look at the Capital Football Elite program for boys and girls. Under 10 boys have a squad - under 10 girls don't. Why? We have a professional women's team in Canberra but no boys team. So if you can justify that to me I'll buy you lunch....mate!

No Elite Girls under 10 in Canberra? How does that fit with Han's recommendations?

Technical Development Disagreement Number 3:




I think player technical development in clubland would be developed more quickly and further if:

Players played 7 v 7 at 10 and 11, 9 v 9 at 12 on smaller pitches.
Players at Under 12 PSSA, Under 13 National Championships and in all club games didn't play on massive Hawker pitches or massive pitches at your local club. Majura, my club, has moved to put all 12,13 14 and 15 year old games where possible on our smallest pitches next season. We're focusing on skill development.

We're ahead of Capital Football on this one - but they'll catch us up in time!

Why would a club throw the SSG philosophy out at 12 - especially in clubland where we have no pressure to win really do we?

Australian Technical Director talks of pitch sizes, all the coaching courses talk of changing the training area to suit the drills, so why does your local club and association and national body choose huge pitches for 12 and 13 year olds.

Is your local 12 year old boy or girl Brett Emerton? Do the huge spaces improve skill and technique?



Well I don't agree with this - many players are playing two Capital Football sessions, or three, Futsal, and Capital Futsal Nationals. that's five sessions minimum a week for our best of the best. Is it effective training, in every age group for the group or more importantly individual players?

I've seen a number of sessions and coaches over the years - some have been brilliant, absolutely first class - some Coaches have been on their mobile phones during sessions!

Are individual player skills and weaknesses really targeted and improved quickly in such a training model? Food for thought for 12/13 year olds? Not all players are at the same level when they enter these programs.

And finally Han and I agree:



Got to agree with you there Han, Mike Cockerill and co often miss the point and finer details of football in my view - the system is a great teacher for kids, clubs and their coaches and gives everyone an insight into football tactics, roles etc. Once everyone knows the system and the roles who knows where the discussions along the sidelines at grassroots level might lead.

And finally Han can we have a curriculum?

Han and co talk of the national curriculum - it's more a national outline isn't it.

When I was teaching Economics the curriculum showed me what I needed to do at each age level, each month, each week.

So isn't it about time we, the grassroots gurus got to see what the curriculum, detailed curriculum is for each age group of should I just keep making it up.

And while you're at it can you give some technical guidance to our futsal grassroots coaches and associations - how much could that improve technique.

Han - it's not all about the boys, it's not all about the elite, and I'd encourage you to go further and adopt all of my points above and see Australian football take the next step...at all levels of the game.

Won't it be a great day when players can break into Australian teams and never have been through a State Association elite program? Imagine a player rocking up from a local club highly developed technically and able to fit into the playing system based on the knowledge he/she has been given by her club.

Maybe this should be a goal!

Edited by nearpost: 9/11/2011 09:22:13 AM

Near Post, would it be possible to put in italics/bold print where Han speaks to differentiate your thoughts and his?

I visited Woden Valley club a few years ago. It was pretty impressive in the lower age groups.

Agree, I found that difficult to understand.

Decentric - quotes amended

Woden Valley actually buck the trend - keeping 5 v 5 up until the Age of U9. Capital Football have told them they must change to the FFA model - but Woden persist in doing what is best for player development.

Don't see Woden underperforming as a result - although equally I'm unsure if it has taken the club further ahead in skill development. Guess players need more than just 5 v 5 on a Saturday and if they aren't getting it for more than 16 weeks the improvement would be marginal.

Still reckon it is the way to be - at least up until U10 - and could argue up until U12. Focus in field size and player numbers is clearly on Elite squads at State level, or players who are furthest advanced done the most football by 9,10, 11 and 12 - and this doesn't improve or impact on the other 99% of our players. What are we doing for them?

Many of them could and would develop into technically sound players by 13 or 14 so community football could really be improved. Slow learners out there in FFA land.

Imagine putting every student into the elite maths class at 9, 10, 11 and 12. How would that assist student learning?

i would be keen to flick the latest FFT mag and read the story on han berger and read what he has to say, intersting times indeed!

No one gives a rats about the perceived technical quality of park football, nor should they.

Applicable to here and anywhere overseas.

A nations football pedigree is carved from performances at both international and top tier club level.

Why do you persist in ignoring that numbers is important?
1% of 100,000 is 1,000
1% of 1,000,000 is 10,000
If only the top 1% of participants are going to be any good wouldn't you prefer to have more of them?
The cream that is at the top is not a fixed number, if you increase participation rates by 10 times then you will have a larger pool of elite and potentially elite players. To suggest that you will only ever have the same number of elite players no matter how many participants you have is folly, and I don't think you are usually one given to folly.

Stop talking sense GA. I typed a response and then wiped it. It's not worth it.

The example given (see above) was for 13 and 14 year old community players.

If you believe they are in the mix for future top tier club and national teams then you have clearly NFI about the realities of football development.

Can't say this surprises me. :lol:

Brought FFT Mag of this months edition and read though the interview with Han Berger it was really good, very informative and gives everyone a clear idea on what the FFA plans are in terms of youth development, well done FFT!

You seem to have a limited view of football and it's role.

I don't think "no one gives a rats about perceived tech quality of park football - nor should they. You clearly haven't been in dressing rooms overseas, played in the local park and listened to how people talk about the game they are involved in.

Also if we have all aussie young kids playing football at some stage between 5-10 - or a heap of them - don't you think the FFA, the Clubs, and we the football community have some kind of responsibility to show/assist our young people how to play the game. And players of all ages and levels will get more fun from the game if they have a better technique.

No brainer - and why pursue anything if you are crap. Most will give us asap.

I'd argue a nations football pedigree is actually carved from the way people play, talk and analyse the game at all levels. Sure International performances and top tier is where we see the game, the style a nation plays but if it doesn't translate down to or up from the youngest of our kids - what's the point.

Think Japan.

How does their national team play, men and womens?

Do you think there would be a mis-match between national team and 8 year old boys/girls community players. Bet the styles are much more closely aligned in parent thinking, player thinking, (age adjusted of course.)

Bet the Aussie mis-match is much bigger.

Fair points made, good post, Near Post.=d>

I'm assuming by your comment you haven't been in straya long, yes?

You assume a lot about a lot and mostly you are wrong:) Been here 20 years.
How about you, do you have a background in playing, developing players, or just an observer of the Socceroos?

Seems like your not across current player development issues.

Perhaps in another 20 years you might threaten to get a grip on Aussie sockah kulcha.

In which state ;)