Tactics, Technique + Team Play

[Unregistered]

Recently, I've been pondering how the US approaches soccer, and have come to the conclusion that we're getting the style of play and results we're training to acheive.

While watching Nike's The Chance "Find" videos. Pep G. comes on and discusses technique and skill and vision. He downplays physical, and then discusses technique again. His priorities are clear. Next up is Mia Hamm and her focus is entirely different. She talks about looking for a "difference maker", a player playing "outside" their comfort zone, willing to take chances. Knowing her as a player, team was very important, but the message she sent was the opposite. Hers was the refrain I heard countless times at ODP parents meetings.

No wonder most US teams play individualistic, frantic and out of control. It's how they are being asked to play. It's how we define and select "elite" players, those who are identified and rewarded.

This morning I read Press's blog, (http://www.socceramerica.com/article...3-restart.html )in which she stated, " Some days, Swedish soccer really does seem like an entirely different sport. The players here train quite differently. I'm sure over the next few months, as I discover, digest and decompress, I will understand the differences more, and I look forward to writing about it. I strive to be a complete player. Ideally, a great finisher who is consistently great on and off the ball. If the game has four parts -- tactical sense, technical ability, mental toughness, physical prowess -- Gothenburg FC focuses is the former two, while my experience in American soccer has always concentrated on the latter. So training in an environment with different priorities feels like finding the missing jigsaw pieces."

An Argentinian buddy + coach here in Mass, and I spoke this weekend, and he hit the nail on the head as well. He explained that in the US the game is all about effort and the individual, while in his home country each individual is expected to meld with the team. When a player tries to "play outside their comfort zone" or run around like a chicken with their head cut off, they are teased by their teamamtes and benched by the coach.

Christen Press is 100% correct. Tactical sense, technique, and team play are the missing jigsaw pieces for US soccer. Once we shift our focus, and it seems to slowly be happening, we'll improve at all levels of the game. My grandkids are gonna play some amazing soccer.

[Unregistered]

Recently, I've been pondering how the US approaches soccer, and have come to the conclusion that we're getting the style of play and results we're training to acheive.

While watching Nike's The Chance "Find" videos. Pep G. comes on and discusses technique and skill and vision. He downplays physical, and then discusses technique again. His priorities are clear. Next up is Mia Hamm and her focus is entirely different. She talks about looking for a "difference maker", a player playing "outside" their comfort zone, willing to take chances. Knowing her as a player, team was very important, but the message she sent was the opposite. Hers was the refrain I heard countless times at ODP parents meetings.

No wonder most US teams play individualistic, frantic and out of control. It's how they are being asked to play. It's how we define and select "elite" players, those who are identified and rewarded.

This morning I read Press's blog, (http://www.socceramerica.com/article...3-restart.html )in which she stated, " Some days, Swedish soccer really does seem like an entirely different sport. The players here train quite differently. I'm sure over the next few months, as I discover, digest and decompress, I will understand the differences more, and I look forward to writing about it. I strive to be a complete player. Ideally, a great finisher who is consistently great on and off the ball. If the game has four parts -- tactical sense, technical ability, mental toughness, physical prowess -- Gothenburg FC focuses is the former two, while my experience in American soccer has always concentrated on the latter. So training in an environment with different priorities feels like finding the missing jigsaw pieces."

An Argentinian buddy + coach here in Mass, and I spoke this weekend, and he hit the nail on the head as well. He explained that in the US the game is all about effort and the individual, while in his home country each individual is expected to meld with the team. When a player tries to "play outside their comfort zone" or run around like a chicken with their head cut off, they are teased by their teamamtes and benched by the coach.

Christen Press is 100% correct. Tactical sense, technique, and team play are the missing jigsaw pieces for US soccer. Once we shift our focus, and it seems to slowly be happening, we'll improve at all levels of the game. My grandkids are gonna play some amazing soccer.

I think you are missing Hamm's point. The problem with the US is that in the risk zone players from a very young age are encouraged to think pass first shoot second. It should be the opposite. Once players get in close to the net surrendering the ball to transition is more likely than not to result in the other team taking possession. It is simply a matter of numbers. Players need to encouraged and confident to attempt to beat another player 1 v 1 rather than just making a safe possession oriented pass.

The biggest problem with US soccer is the constant shuffling of rosters trying to build a team of 11 all-stars rather than a team of complementary parts. If you do not know what your teammate is going to do in a certain situation, how do you function as a coherent team.

Far too many in the US view T.O.P. as some kind of achievement worth crowing about. i.e. "we lost 2-1 but we outpossessed them!!!!". At U12 good. U16-18? Bad.

The only time TOP matters is late in the game when preserving a lead. First half? Down a goal? Not so important.

[Unregistered]

I understand the importance of intelligent possession. Most US teams do not have the technique and skill to be patient and wait for the proper opening. Sometimes teams should get into the attacking 1/3 but reset, redirecting the ball to another point of attack. Most head one direction.....forward.

U12 is when player's should be encouraged to take players on and improve their one on one skills so that when they are older, and they understand the tactical time and field position dictate they beat a player, they are able to do so.

Watch the Hamm "choice". I don't think I misunderstood her. Her spoken focus is very American. Her play was less so, partly because she knew her teammates after years of playing together. Good point you made.

[Unregistered]

There is a maxim in the professional leagues in Europe. "Urgency in soccer is an unreliable friend". This is extremely relevent to U.S. teenage soccer, but I would change it a bit: "Urgency in youth soccer reliably creates a predictable and frustrating game."

I recently had the opportunity to watch the U17 and U20 National Teams train and play against each other over a two week period. It was interesting, especially in light of my observations over the past few seasons of a number of teenage games and training sessions, both in high school and club settings.

For most teenage players, the most glaring needs concern the abilities to make crisp, smooth passes with pace that do not bounce or skip, and to receive balls cleanly, especially when running at speed directly toward the passer, most often when "checking" for balls. Even with U17 and U20 National Team players, more than half the time on their first touch, they popped balls up to their waist or two or three feet away from them in an unplanned direction.

Coaches of teenage players would do well to have practices where playing constantly are making and receiving hard, accurate passes under the pressure of limited time and space, but maximum movement. During the past few years I have seen thousands of "keep away" and two touch exercises designed to reinforce good passing and receiving. The reality, however, is that most often the spaces used are unrealistic, the passes too soft and the players move very little. They may keep possession for three or four passes, but the players move virtually nowhere, and coaches generally do not demand crisp, accurate play. In essence, there is no replication of the pressure of the real game. Consequently, when the players actually play in the game, their lack of tight control and balance while playing and running at speeds leads to constant battles for the ball; more often than not, most players' second touch is a tackle.

The tactical issues presented in most teenage games also require attention. The most prevalent tactical characteristic of these games is a direct footrace type of play that more often resembles a ping pong match rather than good soccer. This is true even at the highest levels. When the U20s played games against the U17s, they tended to physically dominate the younger players. Faced with this pressure, the U17s' primary response was to try to speed the game up, play longer and more direct passes, hoping for a crack in the defense somewhere - and they were increasingly frustrated and rebuffed.

The tendency towards "urgency" is partly because of age. The predominant response to pressure for many young players is to impetuously fight back harder. There is another more subtle, yet pervasive factor. Most if not all of the U17 (National Team) players were selected for "elite" teams when they were 11 to 14 years old, ages when there often are noticeable differences in physical maturity. The touchstone for success for most elite teams is that their star players can outrun opponents. The most used "tactic", therefore, is direct play - unimaginative long balls with no attempt at guile - where a physically precocious player most often prevails. This tactic may be "successful" through the early teens, but its effectiveness diminishes significantly later, when there is more physical parity among players. This early emphasis on direct play, however, becomes ingrained in these players, and they rely on it more heavily as they grow and the pressure of the game becomes more intense. The unfortunate result is that the vast majority of these elite players become one dimensional cookie-cutter players, unable to solve the problems of the game differently, imaginatively or creatively. - Gary Allen, Virginia Director of Coaching

[Unregistered]

There is a maxim in the professional leagues in Europe. "Urgency in soccer is an unreliable friend". This is extremely relevent to U.S. teenage soccer, but I would change it a bit: "Urgency in youth soccer reliably creates a predictable and frustrating game."

I recently had the opportunity to watch the U17 and U20 National Teams train and play against each other over a two week period. It was interesting, especially in light of my observations over the past few seasons of a number of teenage games and training sessions, both in high school and club settings.

For most teenage players, the most glaring needs concern the abilities to make crisp, smooth passes with pace that do not bounce or skip, and to receive balls cleanly, especially when running at speed directly toward the passer, most often when "checking" for balls. Even with U17 and U20 National Team players, more than half the time on their first touch, they popped balls up to their waist or two or three feet away from them in an unplanned direction.

Coaches of teenage players would do well to have practices where playing constantly are making and receiving hard, accurate passes under the pressure of limited time and space, but maximum movement. During the past few years I have seen thousands of "keep away" and two touch exercises designed to reinforce good passing and receiving. The reality, however, is that most often the spaces used are unrealistic, the passes too soft and the players move very little. They may keep possession for three or four passes, but the players move virtually nowhere, and coaches generally do not demand crisp, accurate play. In essence, there is no replication of the pressure of the real game. Consequently, when the players actually play in the game, their lack of tight control and balance while playing and running at speeds leads to constant battles for the ball; more often than not, most players' second touch is a tackle.

The tactical issues presented in most teenage games also require attention. The most prevalent tactical characteristic of these games is a direct footrace type of play that more often resembles a ping pong match rather than good soccer. This is true even at the highest levels. When the U20s played games against the U17s, they tended to physically dominate the younger players. Faced with this pressure, the U17s' primary response was to try to speed the game up, play longer and more direct passes, hoping for a crack in the defense somewhere - and they were increasingly frustrated and rebuffed.

The tendency towards "urgency" is partly because of age. The predominant response to pressure for many young players is to impetuously fight back harder. There is another more subtle, yet pervasive factor. Most if not all of the U17 (National Team) players were selected for "elite" teams when they were 11 to 14 years old, ages when there often are noticeable differences in physical maturity. The touchstone for success for most elite teams is that their star players can outrun opponents. The most used "tactic", therefore, is direct play - unimaginative long balls with no attempt at guile - where a physically precocious player most often prevails. This tactic may be "successful" through the early teens, but its effectiveness diminishes significantly later, when there is more physical parity among players. This early emphasis on direct play, however, becomes ingrained in these players, and they rely on it more heavily as they grow and the pressure of the game becomes more intense. The unfortunate result is that the vast majority of these elite players become one dimensional cookie-cutter players, unable to solve the problems of the game differently, imaginatively or creatively. - Gary Allen, Virginia Director of Coaching

The average male team aged 17 to 20 in the US plays a North South game at a frenetic pace. Arms flailing, feet thudding on the turf, the defender keeping pace at breakneck speed, clutching, grabbing, the offensive player likewise flailing with mostly futile attempts to ward off the defender, the possessing teams no possessing players running helter skelter in an equally frenetic manner with utter disregard for shape, runs into space, or an awareness or understanding of the intentions of the ball-carrier.

This is the product of 10 years of club play that favors size, power and speed above all else.

IF, at the end of an 80 yard run that may have seen 2 or 3 successful passes, the ball-possessor will crank off a high velocity shot 20 feet high and 20 feet wide of the net from an unlikely-to-score angle. All with a tousled blond hair ruffling and three footed landing flourish.

The parents of these players will nod approvingly to each other about how wonderful their kids and team are while visions run throught their heads of money-bearing sheep leap endlessly over fences while bleating D1 money, D1 money, D1uhuhuhuhuh - muuhuhuhuhuhny..........

[Unregistered]

There is a maxim in the professional leagues in Europe. "Urgency in soccer is an unreliable friend". This is extremely relevent to U.S. teenage soccer, but I would change it a bit: "Urgency in youth soccer reliably creates a predictable and frustrating game."

I recently had the opportunity to watch the U17 and U20 National Teams train and play against each other over a two week period. It was interesting, especially in light of my observations over the past few seasons of a number of teenage games and training sessions, both in high school and club settings.

For most teenage players, the most glaring needs concern the abilities to make crisp, smooth passes with pace that do not bounce or skip, and to receive balls cleanly, especially when running at speed directly toward the passer, most often when "checking" for balls. Even with U17 and U20 National Team players, more than half the time on their first touch, they popped balls up to their waist or two or three feet away from them in an unplanned direction.

Coaches of teenage players would do well to have practices where playing constantly are making and receiving hard, accurate passes under the pressure of limited time and space, but maximum movement. During the past few years I have seen thousands of "keep away" and two touch exercises designed to reinforce good passing and receiving. The reality, however, is that most often the spaces used are unrealistic, the passes too soft and the players move very little. They may keep possession for three or four passes, but the players move virtually nowhere, and coaches generally do not demand crisp, accurate play. In essence, there is no replication of the pressure of the real game. Consequently, when the players actually play in the game, their lack of tight control and balance while playing and running at speeds leads to constant battles for the ball; more often than not, most players' second touch is a tackle.

The tactical issues presented in most teenage games also require attention. The most prevalent tactical characteristic of these games is a direct footrace type of play that more often resembles a ping pong match rather than good soccer. This is true even at the highest levels. When the U20s played games against the U17s, they tended to physically dominate the younger players. Faced with this pressure, the U17s' primary response was to try to speed the game up, play longer and more direct passes, hoping for a crack in the defense somewhere - and they were increasingly frustrated and rebuffed.

The tendency towards "urgency" is partly because of age. The predominant response to pressure for many young players is to impetuously fight back harder. There is another more subtle, yet pervasive factor. Most if not all of the U17 (National Team) players were selected for "elite" teams when they were 11 to 14 years old, ages when there often are noticeable differences in physical maturity. The touchstone for success for most elite teams is that their star players can outrun opponents. The most used "tactic", therefore, is direct play - unimaginative long balls with no attempt at guile - where a physically precocious player most often prevails. This tactic may be "successful" through the early teens, but its effectiveness diminishes significantly later, when there is more physical parity among players. This early emphasis on direct play, however, becomes ingrained in these players, and they rely on it more heavily as they grow and the pressure of the game becomes more intense. The unfortunate result is that the vast majority of these elite players become one dimensional cookie-cutter players, unable to solve the problems of the game differently, imaginatively or creatively. - Gary Allen, Virginia Director of Coaching

BING-OH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Mr. Allen has hit the nail squarely on the head.

The unspoken part of his quote? Club IS the problem. Recruiting, premature obsession with winning, and constantly shifting teammates as one player after another is cut for the adonis with speed and a big foot.

[Unregistered]

Additional problem is that even at the highest level of youth soccer, our regional and national youth teams, the emphasis is on improving endurance, strength, and anaerobic training. Until there is a change in the mentality of coaches, we will continue to just see more of the same which means American players will be very fit, very athletic, and possess a strong work ethic, but technically and tactically weak.