Sorry - I only just saw this now...

I thought it was pretty much what it was going to be. It's a program that's been needed for a while - but, It's not exactly ground breaking stuff. I remember doing similar training when I was 8 or 9 when I was growing up in the UK. It's definitely good to have a standardised approach to coaching skills to youngsters tho. Can see it having a positive impact.

Will also be good to put pressure on some of the "money making" set-up's. I coach at an academy in Melb. The kids aged 8-12 train 6 sessions a week, and 12 - 18 train 7 sessions a week. Will be interested to see how we can apply the SAP to our coaching.




Edited by forbze: 28/12/2010 12:18:01 AM

I couldn't be bothered to go through all the posts but i done the olds Senior Licence. The exemption that i got was i could go straight to the Youth licence without doing grassroots or junior. It was the case when i done mine that the Youth Licence was the was the best you could hope to start at. I played super league and thought i was hard done by but i even had Paul Wade in my Youth licence! so no further exemptions (might have changed now?).

As for how the 4-3-3 compare to other formations, the 4-3-3 is very much about closing space when defending and requires players of i high technical knowledge as in players who can read a game, follow instructions and know where to be in a certain scenario. This formation is mainly played in zones or zonal when defending to cut out options and potential next pass closest to the ball.

Attacking wise it requires fast ball movement, triangles to keep options at all times but in my opinion most importantly it requires supporting play. One of the most technical Dutch coaches is/was Foppe De Hann. His philosophy was to play the ball as direct as possible, support the ball carrier and to always believe that the will to win has to be greater than the fear of losing.

Now with the direct play (and there is a difference between direct and long ball) the 2 wide men of the front 3 should hug the line and give the option of the direct pass from midfield or defence. When this happens the player in the # 10 role should be reading this pass and offer the option of a knock down from the wide player, then look to play the ball to the over lapping wing back. How it compares to other formations such as a 4-4-2 really depends on the players and the players ability to understand how to play the 4-3-3. When played well the 4-3-3 is very entertaining and hard to stop.

Without knowing what sort of knowlege the people on here have, i would strongly suggest watching games from the Eredivisie (only the better teams) and see how their patterns of play are.

Good Luck guys hope you find this all helpful and remember everything you learn or see are guidelines its up to you to implement them with your own stle and flavour.

well, if we talk about the performance then france and brazil really done a good job in getting the world cup but may be this time they are out of luck or may be leading to the different path..


http://www.linkedin.com/answers/browse/marketing-sales/sales/lead-generation/MAR_SLS_LGN

What did you think of the presentation forbze?

Skillaroos is the name for the group of Under 13's that will be selected as part of the Skill Acquisition Program for each of the state bodies.

The SAP is going to be broken into two age groups - Phase 1 (9-11), and Phase 2 (12).

Essentially it'll be a group of kids who get year round Skills training from a Skill instructor 2 or 3 times a week and will replace the state U13 team.

Anyone in the Skillaroos won't be able to play winter football, and during Summer (VCL in vic) will have 1 session with a Skill Instructor, and 2 with their VCL who hopefully will be using the SAP as a model for their training sessions.

There was a presentation on this in Melbourne last night - so check your local state bodies about when they will be running their presentations / launches.

http://www.footballaustralia.com.au/site/_content/document/00001565-source.pdf

Totally agree with your view regarding juniors. Keeping it simple with minimal formation changes gives the juniors a concrete block to work with. Then as they progress in years formation adaptations can be slowly introduced always using the original formation for reference in case it goes pear shaped. It's when complex formations are attempted the whole shape can become a mess.

Strangely enough with seniors keeping it simple is also the best option. It really depends on the level of players (and how bright they are) a coach is working with and the levels of fitness of his players.

As a former player who's now way past his playing day's I watch today kids from under 10's through to over 45's at various levels of the game and note some interesting observations.

Generally teams between,

10-14's tend to stick with the same formation throughout the match rotating players.

15-18's often start a formation but the formation changes by coaches replacing say a defender with mid or mid with attacker which changes the formation.

19-34's Will start a formation but by this age they are experienced enough to drop back or push forward changing formations constantly. This is when players are physically at their peak and the coach doesn't have to do the thinking for them.

35-45's+ This is where experience really shows and players tend to use positional play rather than the physical formation changes. The less physical work they do the better.

So just what is the best formation?

I really think it depends on the age group a coach is dealing with and the abilities of the players. No point choosing hard physical formations for the old boys and no point using complex formations for young kids. The best formation is the one that best suits your team you are coaching. If your team is winning a few games and enjoying themselves then your on the right path to the right formation. Keep it simple but slightly challenging.

Generally by half time a coach will know whether a formation change is required in accordance with areas that need assistance.

Edited by Aussiesrus: 13/12/2010 10:10:22 AM

In the 4-3-3 with the backwards and forwards triangles, it really condenses midfield space.

The 4-5-1 doesn't place the same workload on wingers, as the wing backs in the 3-5-2. The onus on them is to almost cover three lines as opposed to the two wingers covering two in the 4-5-1.

For professional teams it is useful for teams to change from a 4-3-3 with the forwards triangle in midfield, to a 2-5-3 in attack.

Another variation of a 4-2-3-1 in defence is becoming a 3-3-3-1 in attack. Professional teams are extremely fit and can adapt these variations.

Once amateur players start varying positions in the lines, depending on the main moments of play, ie when a team is in possession or not in possession, it is very difficult for amateur players to sustain the physical effort. This is particularly true on big pitches.

Some good points have been made in this discussion.

With juniors (even seniors) it is preferable to play a shape with few variations well. This is opposed to implementing a number of variations on a formation poorly. A formation is only effective as long as a team keeps its shape. If a team it loses it, it becomes ineffective.

Correct distancing between, and within, the lines is paramount.

Various coaches have spoken about using complex variations of shapes in junior/youth teams. Often when one observes them in practice, the shapes can be difficult to decipher.

When the Tasmanian team played the Central Coast Mariners in the middle of the year, they lost their shape for extended periods in the first half. It was during its loss of shape periods that Tasmania suffered its least effective passages of the match.

Edited by Decentric: 5/12/2010 11:37:53 PM

This could be a very effective tactic in competitive senior sides but I would not reccomend using this with any youth teams purely because it is too one dimensional in attacking straight down the middle.
The problem with Australia is we don't produce enough wingers and our young fullbacks, because they are being taught at a young age by people who dont understand the game that they should always back. That is what this tactic is promoting defensive fullbacks and wingers, which is fine if thats what you want but our national curriculum clearly states otherwise. The two fullbacks in attack are essentially central defenders and because of their defensive duties one failed dribble by a winger could result in an easy counter attack which could kill the childs confidence and stop him becoming a special no fear type winger that we all love to see.

what is the FFA Skilleroos program?

http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/australia/news/1034587/FFA-s-plan-to-win-Qatar-2022



Edited by krones3: 5/12/2010 08:51:53 AM

Well it doesn't have to be limited to the central defender to push forward. It really depends which side of the park the ball is on. Left or right defender can move into an attacking position if the ball is right or left.

Most games are won or lost in the midfield. With defenders pushing forward to form up 5 across the middle this gives the numbers advantage in most cases except the 4-3-3 when the two wingers drop back to mids forming up a 4-5-1 which means equal mids. However the amount of work required by wingers to automatically drop back into a 4-5-1 sees them tire very quickly (AKA Harry Kewell's complaint of the 4-3-3). The 4-4-2 forming up to 3-5-2 only requires one player to move forward and any defender can interchange into the 3-5-2 attack formation which spreads the workload around.

Another key tactic is for players to slide across the park in the mids stacking the area of the ball and giving players more options. This usually give a total numbers advantage in any one given area.

So compared to a 3-5-2 attack and 4-4-2 defence,
4-3-3 has less mids, 3-4-3 has less mids, 4-5-1 has equal mids but requires heavy workload from wingers, 5-4-1 also requires heavy workload from players but has the overall defensive advantage. 2-5-3 when attacking is susceptible to counters.

Interesting discussion FMVS and food for thought, Thanks for your feedback.

Edited by Aussiesrus: 20/11/2010 09:05:25 AM

I see so you attack in a 3-5-2 however defend in a 4-4-2.

My only personal issue with that is that your fullbacks aren't allowed to get forward which is something I personally like fullbacks doing.

The other issue I can see is against a 4-3-3 you are either going to have 3 defenders marking 1 striker or 3 defenders marking 3 forwards. Either way I would suggest that it is a lose lose situation.

However against a standard 4-4-2 which is probably what you would come up against mainly in Australia I could see this formation dominating.
Reasons:
- You would have 3 defenders against 2 strikers to protect counter attacks.
- You would have an extra man in midfield when attacking allowing your 4 across the middle to be able to push up a lot more (basically all four could attack and you could leave the 3 defenders and 1 holding in front of them).

Maybe something you could look at if you like this system is the way Mexico play a similar system. Because they mainly come up against teams with one striker they play:

3-4-3 (5-4-1) when defending and when attacking 2-5-3 (4-3-3) depends how you want to look at it. (Their captian Marquez plays that central defender pushing on).

This system allows 2 central defenders to be marking 1 striker which I think is more desirable situation.

Interesting replies Decentric. Best of luck with your new "BIG" football school. Sounds very exciting.

On the topic of the 4-3-3 system which is most interesting I see there are many formation options. I'm an old school lad and not a big fan of the 4-3-3 system however I can see the benefits.

My personal choice of formations is to use a 4-4-2 with a roving forward central defender. IE: When we are on the attack in their half the central defender pushes forward forming a 3-5-2 thus also forming the triangles. When we are defending in own half this causes the central defender to make sure he has dropped backed into the 4-4-2 position. This has advantages over the 4-3-3 in that if we look at the flaws associated with the 4-4-2 in a standard attack pattern the reverse is applicable and the 4-3-3 becomes flawed in the 4-4-2 defensive mode.

I've found the above to be very successful especially when teams have struggled with standard 4-3-3 and standard 4-4-2.

I would agree with that however I would do all of the above basically in one session due to:
a) Kids would get bored
b) Most teams only train twice a week.

So basically:
Warm up: 1,2,3
Phase 2: 4,5,6

And the last and probably most important point would be trying the technique in a GAME which would be in my final phase.

i asked myself the same question but apparently this is the first time it's been made public. It's a great read. I wish the club had released it last season through our dark year.. it's really positive and assuring to see this sort of stuff happening in the backend.

Don't know how I missed this one but a good read.

http://theworldgame.sbs.com.au/news/1030331/Adelaide-leads-the-way

Adelaide Case Study PDF

I have also taught karate.

I sometimes apply the teaching of karate technique methodology to football. Here are some sequential steps.

1. Try the technique very slowly. This usually works.

2. Speed it up.

3. Do it at higher speed with the head up.

3. Try the technique against an opponent, but the opponent should be pretty passive (not trying to win the ball, but be a slow moving obstacle).

4. Try the technique repetitively against a more active defender.

5. Try the technique changing speeds in the one run against a defender and try to keep the head up.

Edited by Decentric: 6/11/2010 08:07:21 AM

If it is it wasn't taught in my course. Whether it is old practice, I'm not sure. I have Dutch Soccer Skills Books, 1 2 and 3. These types of drills are shown in these books. I was disappointed that there was no explicit KNVB handbook handed out.

There was no explicit technique instruction in my course. It seems that Andy did this in the C Licence.

The KNVB course I did was fundamentally tactical. I was told though I leant too far back when I passed the ball though. I corrected it under close tutelage. However, they were very explicit about how much technique should be taught at specific ages compared to game sense (insight).

The ball techniques I impart are derived from:
1. Matildas dribbling exercises.
2. Verseijen's exercises.
3. Dutch Soccer Skills three books.
4. Internet.
5. A little Coerver
6. Brazilian Soccer Schools dribbling and turning techniques ( I can do most of them). They are pretty difficult, but I can't for the life of me do the elastic properly. It is very frustrating, because it is the technique I see used most often and very sucessfully in games apart from the Brazilian step overs. I've tried to do the elastic for years. I'm still unable to do it, yet alone teach it.
7. A variety of coaching instruction books.



Edited by Decentric: 6/11/2010 07:56:40 AM

As I was a hack in my playing days and getting a bit older too, I have limited ball skills so I downloaded 12 core player moves from youtube such as the Zidanes signature move.
Distributed them to the team and our warmup was practising the 12 moves and a couple extra that the kids could come up with. As the season wore on they would challenge themselves with combinig two or three moves.

The DVD became a great tool for visualisation and demostration.

My first post on this section thanks Andy and may it continue.



Deccentric doesn't the Dutch Method also include "circuit" training where two three or four drills are set up with players rotating through the drills. ( eg four groups of four each group doing one of four drills rotating through.)

What I'm finding many junior coaches are having problems dealing with is content. What compounds that is the minimal time available for training. In Australia the kids traditionally train twice a week, while the Dutch would have three or four sessions over a longer season too.
What the Dutch realise and we are becomming accutely aware of is that in that short time the kids practise we as coaches need to maximise the players "effective" practise. This goes back to;



Of course thats why running and queing are diffinite no no's.
Thus the players have variety and I suppose "intensity" a word I hear more and more in relation to junior development.

Basically I did the roulette because one of my players could do it and I wanted him to show the players and teach it to them + It was a bit of fun. It is the move Zidane was famous for. Stop/roll the ball twist body turn with studs of opp foot.

Stud turn is just putting your studs on the ball and rolling it the opp way. I think Matt Thompson did it this week in the lead up to his goal.

I never did all the techniques in one session I concentrated on a few each session until the last third of the season where I did most of them because they were familiar with them and would easily get bored if I didn't give them more techniques and make them do it quicker.

The 4-2-3-1 may be an answer to teaching players the 4-3-3 with the midfield triangle featuring two defensive screeners and one attacking midfielder.

Laying out the four lines may be easier. I will try this next time.

Thanks Andy.

I was going to go into the permutations of the 4-3-3. Saved me the trouble.

I hadn't thought of the 4-2-3-1 advantages of 4 lines. This is based on some empirical coaching by you and others.

The other phemenon about 4-3-3 is that we have no system that has been well taught to the bulk of coaches in this country.

4-3-3 is used at a youth and senior system in Netherlands, Belgium and Denmark. Germany borrowed heavily on Dutch methodology some 8 years ago.

The Spanish and French use it at youth level. Some Brazilian clubs use it. The premise is that it is easier to play other systems like flat 4-4-2, if one has learnt a more complex system which is predicated on triangles/diamonds.

The Dutch teach the 4-3-3 very well, incrementally and systematically. We have had an ad hoc approach. Nobody has learnt a uniform system well in Australia. I have found it difficult teaching the backwards and forwards midfield triangles well to 11 and 12 year olds. Then again, I have seen one of the top women's teams in this state struggle with the triangle too. One of them is a former Matilda too!!

The earlier teams succeed at it the better for international level. Graham Arnold had great difficulty imparting 4-3-3 with its inherent triangles and diamonds to the Australian A league squad he used against Kuwait.

In the World Cup, the top three teams, Spain , Holland and Germany, all played 4-3-3/4-2-3-1. The naysayers say 4-2-3-1 will eventually be usurped by another possible system. True. They don't proffer a superior or alternative methodology though.

Edited by Decentric: 6/11/2010 07:50:43 AM

I quite like the look of this session.

What is a roulette and a stud turn?

The only problem that I can see is that too many techniques may be imparted at once. This is particularly in light of the fact that the players have only played for a year.

It is interesting that KNVB like the four stage module depicted in one of my aforementioned posts. I saw the Socceroos implement the 11 v 11 with a certain tactical point coached by Verbeek.

KNVB is not dogmatic at all. Far from it.

I like the 1 v 1 and even the 2 v 2s for the high number of touches players get. I've observed a state coach using a lot of it. Of course there is no width and depth. It is also a possibility in the first stage of the KNVB training module. In reality given it is often difficult to have enough players for an 11 v 11 session, it is possible to slip in the 1v1 stuff earlier on in the session.

I'm told that in the American college system they use a lot of 1 v 1 training. Players from Australia who play in the US college system, find it confronting when they are faced with it in the USA, particularly women.



Edited by Decentric: 5/11/2010 12:03:09 PM

I was approached.

I certainly wasn't ready to rep coach from suburban club coaching, but a friend was a regional junior association president. He asked me to do it for a team in the region. They weren't happy with the previous rep coach of the team for attitudinal reasons.

He also knew I'd done the KNVB course a few months before. It resulted in fast tracking my knowledge after a week with some top line European coaches.

Having a FFA Senior Licence or C Licence would probably help for rep coaching. One would possibly ned to approach associations. If they don't know you, it makes it difficult.

I'm not sure I'd want to rep coach again. I like the knowledge I've gained being disseminated more widely than a 15-20 player group. A few are always likely to give the game away in their teens.

Well if you have been coaching for that club for a number of years than I would say they owe it to you to show some faith in order to help improve their junior players.

How do you get invloved in rep teams by the way I would like to put my name in the for a north coast one in the next couple of years.

Interesting post for me this one.

When I coached suburban junior teams the general attitude of parents was supportive. They were pleased anyone was coaching their kids. It let them off the hook!

My rep team was different. I had a shocking group of parents. They had been factionalised for years. Some also expected the whole team to revolve around their child too.

Last season, my only coaching was with a senior reserves team for the premier league, the highest level in this state. I thoroughly enjoyed it. None of the difficult parents hassling. Also, senior players helped in a mentoring role with the communication of my concepts to younger players.

However, most coaches I know say they prefer to coach youth. They also find premiers and reserves think they know it all too.

Next year I'm in the embryonic stages of opening a big football school for a premier league club. It could be the biggest in the state. The notion was conceived by me, but the catalyst was a regional junior association president who sees problems in the lack of role models for junior players. it should also be a scenario where I don't have to deal with overly ambitious parents too.

It will be targeted for 10 -12 year olds.

A few senior players from the same club will be rostered on to participate in training sessions. A few of the club 13, 14, 15 year olds will too.

By doing the training ground technical exercises the seniors will see flaws in their own techniques, certainly in terms of two footedness. There will also be 4 v4 games with controls on the senior payers who will play in the same games.

The concept will be to conduct the sessions for players and send them back to clubs, schools, rep teams as better players.

The idea is also for any coaches who want to learn something ( often the parents who know nothing about football, but have been roped in to coach) to attend sessions.