New Direction Required - according to Fozzie

[E. Grant & Co]

If any body saw the World Game yesterday and listened to Craig Foster again raise concerns about the way we are developing players in this country, I wonder how many will heed the warning?

He posed the question, whats more important at the national championships, Stae Champions and even club level, winning or developing players?

The obvious answer from the players and the coaches who were at the Nationals was WINNING . Which is why this current crop of youngsters will be lost to us, yes some will go on and become semi-professionals and some even full professionals, but will they ever be as good as they could be.

I doubt it.

All you coaches out there ask yourself this question and give an honest reply. "Between the ages of 6 and 16 whats more important, winning or developing the player"

Its a safe bet that all of the honest coaches will say developing the player but come match day they'll make sure the team goes out to win. So technique and tactics go out the window to winning the game.

God help us!!!

[johnydep]

If any body saw the World Game yesterday and listened to Craig Foster again raise concerns about the way we are developing players in this country, I wonder how many will heed the warning?

He posed the question, whats more important at the national championships, Stae Champions and even club level, winning or developing players?

The obvious answer from the players and the coaches who were at the Nationals was WINNING . Which is why this current crop of youngsters will be lost to us, yes some will go on and become semi-professionals and some even full professionals, but will they ever be as good as they could be.

I doubt it.

All you coaches out there ask yourself this question and give an honest reply. "Between the ages of 6 and 16 whats more important, winning or developing the player"

Its a safe bet that all of the honest coaches will say developing the player but come match day they'll make sure the team goes out to win. So technique and tactics go out the window to winning the game.

God help us!!!

The whole culture has to change, and that wont happen for a very long time. Winning is part of our society.

I agree; at junior and youth level, development has to come first.

For this to happen there must be changes from every part of the sport, not just the coaches.
We need to change the FFA, FFSA, club administration, coaches, parents, and players (possibly in that order).

The FFA & FFSA are the administrators, they need to bring about regular forums for educators of the sport. Quaterly forums so that coaches and directors can get the latest information, share ideas and see what the best methods are.
This will flow down through to the clubs, parents and players (parents play a very big role in player development).

Actually, the Federation are trying to bring in smaller teams, smaller pitches similar to a futsal set up National Junior Football Framework The idea being that the players get more touches, play all positions and all get a chance at scoring.

I like Fozzie, he's a good person trying to do good things but I think he was a bit harsh on the coaches; the blame must be spread wider.

[lb]

I wasn't actually at the tournament but from what I have heard from people who were there the teams that played the best football were WA and ACT. NSW and VIC were inferior in terms of maintaining possession, their tactical organisation and style of play but at the end of the day they were the ones that were getting the medals and they'll probably be the ones who are selected in Australian sides. It is disappointing but its a fact.

[Željko Jurin]

I saw the show on Sunday, and agree totally with Foster.
People bag him because he wasnt a great player, therefore how does he know what he is talking about. You dont need to be a great player to be a great coach, AND on the other side, just because you were a great player doesnt mean you will automatically be a great coach. Therefore people should listen to more of whats coming out of his mouth rather then think of where he has been and what he has done.

First thing FFSA should do, get rid of A, B, C leagues and either have zonal leagues like u/12's, OR, junior teams play in same league as where your senior team is. This will firstly get rid of the mentality of some parents that my son must play in the A league, to win, and to become a better player.
Before someone says this is a wrong idea and doesnt agree, please back it up with what is then currently wrong with our u/12 league at the moment

[mooroffside]

Zeljko I don't understand what you are trying to get across.

You have mentioned that parents are obsessed with their son playing in the top division and suggested that they should play in zonal leagues. The problem is that these leagues are two tier, so this contradicts what you are proposing. Another problem is that if players are going to develope, they need to play against players of equal ability so that they are challenged. With keeping leagues zonal, they will be playing the same teams every year. Using my sons experience of playing under 10's and 11's these past 2 seasons, he's already mentioned that he is bored with playing the same clubs all the time. Just think what he will be like when he is 14, never mind if he made it to 16's. I don't know what the reasons for zoning the Under 12's but it is a good way of grading for the 13's, but I don't think it should be carried on through the upper ages, the players need to play against the best opponents they can and this won't be achieved by zoning teams.

The other suggestion of linking the juniors to the senior side will definitely reinforce the parents obssession of playing for the "top teams", this again contradicts what you are suggesting. I really have a problem with this suggestion, because the senior teams performance has no bearing on the junior teams. There are successful senior teams, but this is not reflected in their junior teams who are not as strong as their senior counterparts. There are indeed examples of this in the best league. Kids tend to pick the clubs they want to play for, and think very little about the senior team.

As for improving the system, it will take many things. Initially the clubs need to realise that they should take a real responsibilty for the development of players. They should put in place structures for the development and not just leave it to individual coaches. This should be actively encouraged by the FFSA, who in turn should be driven by the FFA. The regional Football Federations should be targeted to initially encourage clubs to define and impliment a club policy on player developement. If clubs are slow in doing this, it should be made a condition of acceptance into the leagues. Harsh I accept but until the FFA and the clubs actually take ownership of the developement of the players, nothing will change.

As for Fozzie, i can't even remember seeing him play, so his playing ability isn't in question. It's his use of sound bites that gets me, he thinks if he says something enough times, people will believe him without actually questioning what he is saying. Then again the fact we are dicussing one of his pet subjects must mean he is doing something right, but I still think he is annoying.

[Željko Jurin]

Mooroffside, I dont know what you mean that the zonal leagues are two tier, the u/12's had 4 zones this year. If your son is bored playing the same teams (at 10 and 11), tell him to get used to it. Does it really change that much in the higher leagues with relegation and promotion, maybe 1 team goes up 1 team drops down, pretty much same teams again the following year.

As long as the kids start playing from a young age, 6-9, by the time they reach 13,14,15 they will have some sort of ability, therefore the team itself, and the 10 or 12 teams in each zone "should" be of roughly equal ability. You cant tell me that the 12 teams (or how many there is) in say the 13A's with 14 players each team, equals 168 players, that all 168 players have the same ability.

And by saying that "the players need to play against the best opponents they can and this wont be achieved by zoning teams" means that currently the u8, u9, u10, u11, u12 leagues should all be A, B, C leagues also as the kids are not developing currently ????????

It's about playing, playing, playing. Playing at home, at school lunch time, in the park, on the street, at the beach, at family bbq's, playing with your Dad/brother/mother/sister, trainings 2 or 3 times a week, that's where kids will develop and improve. Not the 60 or 70 or 80 mins on a Sunday morning, where they play on full size pitches and might only touch the ball a dozen times

That's where I am trying to get across

[mooroffside]

Hi Zeljko

You never said all this in your previous post, now you have, I undertsand a bit more of your point of view.

Firstly, the point of my son, yes I admit that the leagues will roughly remain the same over the years. Due to relegations and promotions there will be at least some variation in the teams, which is something that won't be achieved by zones. Unless new clubs enter into the competion, but thats unlikely to happen is it. So i agree and disagree with that one.

Next point is that I said that the under 12's had a 2 tier system this year, spilt into SW1 SW2 NE1 NE2. This was to argue the point of parents wanting their son to play in the top league. You apparently think there was 4 different zones, which isn't the case.

In the next paragraph you make a wide sweeping statement of players ability. You stated if they all players start at 6-9 by the time they are 13 etc. they will be of a similar standard, some of the scorelines suggest differently last year, especially in the cup. Am I correct that you are in someway connected to Raiders? If not I apologise, but one of Raiders teams proves my point. You mentioned the 13's, who as 12's strolled their B division. When promoted to the A division, they found life more difficult, but as the season went on they found their feet and managed to stay up and deservedly so. This is what I mean by playing against better opposition, they obviously found life in A's more difficult than B's, but they learnt and got better by being challenged by playing at a different level. Which is why they should be graded and not zoned.

As for development, I'm with you on that one. With all the ways you mentioned of kids developing themselves is good, but the clubs are responsible for fine tuning them and turning them into real players.

Thats what I'm trying to get across

[Željko Jurin]

Hello mooroffside

u/12s still seems to me to be 4 zonal leagues. I dont believe the 1 and the 2 denotes as div 1 and div 2. (eg) Adl City is in SW2, and Toros or Noarlunga in SW1. I can give other examples if needed

Yes, I am with Raiders, and the committee is definately looking at the coaches they have to develop the kids to become better players. Hence on a previous topic I have named the coaches, who majority have played at a Super league standard, and for SA state team. To me, its the coaches who are the ones who need to fine tune them and turn them into real players, not the league they play in.

Look, I think yourself, myself, and a lot of others out there just want the best for our kids, the kids we coach, and the clubs we are associated with.

We will agree to disagree in the league structure. But to me, in the current
environment with A, B, C, relegation and promotion, there is too much emphasis on winning, winning, winning, and not development. Too many coaches out there who have never played, have no idea, and the final scoreline on match day tells them if they are a good coach or not.

If the A,B,C structure is so successful in developing kids, then why are we, FFA, FFSA, and SBS even having this discussion

[mooroffside]

Hi Zeljko

Totally agree with you on the developement of kids, but i'm suggesting the coaching methods need to be looked at not just how leagues are formatted. I'm in total agreement that the coaches should be the ones to fine tune the players. Equally the clubs are responsible to fine tune the coaches and FFSA to fine tune the clubs etc. Don't just lay all the emphasis on the individual coach, the club as a whole needs to take responsibilty. If this is what you are trying to achieve at Raiders, I applaud you.

I'm suggesting that part of the development of kids is that at some point they have to be challenged. In their younger years when they are not graded, it's ideal, they can learn to play football. It suits their personalities as players under the age of 10, its all about playing and league tables would only apply undue pressure, which isn't good as the players at that age are sensitive to failing. Unfortunately as they get older their own characteristics, ways of learning and priorities change.The ages of 11 up to 14, is when this occurs. They become more aware of their own abilities and of others, they are starting to become competitive and are starting to think for themselves. This is probably one of the most critical stages of their developement. Hence the need for good coaching. When they get to 15's and above there is so much testorone flying about, the can't help but be competitive, it's in their nature.

So yes I agree that the game is about developement, but at some point in their footballing career they need to be able to measure their success as an individual and as a team member. So some form of structure/grading needs to be in place to satisfy their need of self analysis, they need to understand what their capabilities are. It's human nature.

Can i ask at what age do you think they should become competitive. I think they probably have it right at the moment.

[Željko Jurin]

You can still be competative on a week to week basis on game day.

I agree with tables from u/13 onwards, I just dont agree with A, B, C's and relegation/promotion, until probably 15s or 17s

[mooroffside]

It's not all about winning, but it is about the ability to compete.

One of my memories of last season is when my team played some sublime football, although we still lost the match, I was pleased as punch. The opposition coach shook my hand and said he couldn't believe how much we had improved, that is the measure of how well the team is doing.

Yes I agree, competitiveness on game days is what it is all about, no matter what the age. But the bigger picture for Australian football in the future is at some point it's got to be competitive, and not to dismiss it as having no part of the players developement, when it is really.

Hope your trials go well.

[Željko Jurin]

It's not all about winning, but it is about the ability to compete.

One of my memories of last season is when my team played some sublime football, although we still lost the match, I was pleased as punch. The opposition coach shook my hand and said he couldn't believe how much we had improved, that is the measure of how well the team is doing.

Yes I agree, competitiveness on game days is what it is all about, no matter what the age. But the bigger picture for Australian football in the future is at some point it's got to be competitive, and not to dismiss it as having no part of the players developement, when it is really.

Hope your trials go well.

Same thing, we had a 7 goal and a 6 goal improvement when we played 2 different teams at the start of the season and then played them again at the end of the season. And we lost all 4 times, so you can imagine the first 2 game scores. ( I dont want to give exact scores as it might reveal my identity)

And your trials also, at which club are you mooroffside ???

I think the success of a coach is also measured on if ALL the kids return the next season to play again. Means you are doing something right I think.

Another question for you, for any age team up to say 12 or 13yo. If a child has played in your team for 2 or 3 years, slowly improved but is still behind in his ability compared to your other players. Trials come along, new, better players come out to trial. Do you cut the kid ?????

[johnydep]

Hello mooroffside

u/12s still seems to me to be 4 zonal leagues. I dont believe the 1 and the 2 denotes as div 1 and div 2. (eg) Adl City is in SW2, and Toros or Noarlunga in SW1. I can give other examples if needed

Yes, I am with Raiders, and the committee is definately looking at the coaches they have to develop the kids to become better players. Hence on a previous topic I have named the coaches, who majority have played at a Super league standard, and for SA state team. To me, its the coaches who are the ones who need to fine tune them and turn them into real players, not the league they play in.

Look, I think yourself, myself, and a lot of others out there just want the best for our kids, the kids we coach, and the clubs we are associated with.

We will agree to disagree in the league structure. But to me, in the current
environment with A, B, C, relegation and promotion, there is too much emphasis on winning, winning, winning, and not development. Too many coaches out there who have never played, have no idea, and the final scoreline on match day tells them if they are a good coach or not.

If the A,B,C structure is so successful in developing kids, then why are we, FFA, FFSA, and SBS even having this discussion

Starting to hear some good things coming from Raiders

Develop the coach and they'll develop the players! For too long clubs have left coaches to their own devices, but I think that is changing now. Some clubs are seeing what we are saying.

Have you guys seen this? Have your say' about Coach Education http://www.footballaustralia.com.au/Com ... m&id=19756

[pires7]

I think a major problem with junior games occurs when a team around the u/13 stage has a player who has developed physically alot more than the average 12 year old. This type of player, is quicker stonger and therefore teams win by sending long balls to this player who will do the rest. Come a few years time when everyone catches up, we are left with an average player and a bunch of team mates who were just passengers.

A key area of development should be about playing the ball out at the back at the junior levels, keeping possesion and having fun! A friend of mine's younger brother was playing u/13 at a club, and the coach of this team came over to meet the parents. He was doing everythig right until he mentioned that if the team loses, they do an extra session, and he is angry for a week! This is not what junior football is about!

From my personal experience coming through junior ranks at cricket, football AFL and soccer: I noticed at about age 15, trainings started to become about punishing players for making mistakes. Sit-up, push-ups, sprints etc. this was the major stage when alot of boys started to drop out! Why bother if it aint fun anymore?

My vision is that this is the age where it would be better spent teaching the extra specifics of the game(tactical), whilst still making it fun! Explain to players why it is important to be physically strong through the chest, the importance of keeping possesion, and how fitness plays a part in success.

Hopefully as we see the failings of the past system, more of the right people will be compelled to coach youngsters in the right fassion. One can only hope

[mooroffside]

Hi Zeljko

I think we are really singing from the same song sheet, nice to have a good natured debate.

Unfortunately I'm moving clubs due to family circumstances, but I must say I really enjoyed where I coached last year.

Coming from another country and not being used to trials, I find them somewhat uncomfortable. You've asked me a question about cutting a kid that has been with you for several years, I'll turn it round and ask you why are you having trials if you think that the lads are doing ok. Like I said I don't understand the trial system, especially if you are trying to build teams and maintain kids loyalty.

To answer your question though about cutting kids, for me it depends on several factors, mainly the kids attitude, adaptability and of course ability.

I use this personal experience as my guide. I played many years ago in a boys team, in which there were two players. One was a superstar even at a young age and was already signed up by a major club and he made sure everyone knew about it. The other was a funny looking kid that went about his business and worked hard. I lost touch with the quiet unassumming kid, but carried on playing with the superstar who had gone onto play for his country at schoolboy level. He was signed on professionally when he was 16, made a few appearances for the reserves of the big club and then was let go at 18. He was devastated, never played football again and went to work for his father. The other lad, well what can I say but the next time I saw him, he was scoring a goal in Italia 90 WC. He had a succesful career and he even become the captain of his country. So personally I would take a hardworking player with some ability over a superstar with a bad attitude.

[Željko Jurin]

Hi Zeljko

I think we are really singing from the same song sheet, nice to have a good natured debate.

Unfortunately I'm moving clubs due to family circumstances, but I must say I really enjoyed where I coached last year.

Coming from another country and not being used to trials, I find them somewhat uncomfortable. You've asked me a question about cutting a kid that has been with you for several years, I'll turn it round and ask you why are you having trials if you think that the lads are doing ok. Like I said I don't understand the trial system, especially if you are trying to build teams and maintain kids loyalty.

To answer your question though about cutting kids, for me it depends on several factors, mainly the kids attitude, adaptability and of course ability.

I use this personal experience as my guide. I played many years ago in a boys team, in which there were two players. One was a superstar even at a young age and was already signed up by a major club and he made sure everyone knew about it. The other was a funny looking kid that went about his business and worked hard. I lost touch with the quiet unassumming kid, but carried on playing with the superstar who had gone onto play for his country at schoolboy level. He was signed on professionally when he was 16, made a few appearances for the reserves of the big club and then was let go at 18. He was devastated, never played football again and went to work for his father. The other lad, well what can I say but the next time I saw him, he was scoring a goal in Italia 90 WC. He had a succesful career and he even become the captain of his country. So personally I would take a hardworking player with some ability over a superstar with a bad attitude.

I agree

The reason I asked is just to hear your answer, not because it is happening to me or I need some guidence. I personally HATE the whole trials thing and why it is supposed to be done for. All it does is demoralises kids that miss out, and the stronger teams get stronger, as parents want their kids to play in A grade..........so my whole argument to start with in regards to grading.
No A, B, C leagues, kids will then usually stay with their club if happy with the coaching, hence no need for trials.

My first year of coaching last year, have a small boy for his age first year of playing, technically can kick a ball, control, dribble etc. But in games, like playing with a player short, very timid, too scared to go in due to being intimidated by the 'bigger' boys, frustrating for me. He is a nice kid, get along with parents, parents love the coaching and club. Trials come along, 10 new players try out, all are better players. Will I keep the small kid, YES !!!! Thats just me. Would have the so called "bigger, richer" clubs that have 50-60 kids at trials, kept him. NO, I dont think so. Why, because they want to WIN !!!!

[fossil]

If any body saw the World Game yesterday and listened to Craig Foster again raise concerns about the way we are developing players in this country, I wonder how many will heed the warning?

He posed the question, whats more important at the national championships, Stae Champions and even club level, winning or developing players?

The obvious answer from the players and the coaches who were at the Nationals was WINNING . Which is why this current crop of youngsters will be lost to us, yes some will go on and become semi-professionals and some even full professionals, but will they ever be as good as they could be.

I doubt it.

All you coaches out there ask yourself this question and give an honest reply. "Between the ages of 6 and 16 whats more important, winning or developing the player"

Its a safe bet that all of the honest coaches will say developing the player but come match day they'll make sure the team goes out to win. So technique and tactics go out the window to winning the game.

God help us!!!

I did see the show and thought at the time he may be right but after a while I thought closer on this tournament.
now if we assume that these are not club players but what should be the best from each area than apart from winning how can you measure?
don't focus on the winning but if you have trained well and hold you game plan the winning result would come, so are we now saying that by development achieving the highest possible outcome should not be required?

as for the lower club level it should be development and not so much winning.

[mooroffside]

Hi Zeljko

Not offering advice, only sharing my thoughts as you are.

I understand where you are coming from been in exact same position as you. I just take solace in the fact that the kids have learnt something, and by the end of the season have improved enough to be competitive. Hopefully along the way win a few, just for the kids morale.

As for grading, I can't see an alternative, it's part of life. Kids get graded at school, sports, even boy scouts. It's done to measure ability and their achievements and is part of their devlopemental progress. Rightly or wrongly, this is the way it is.

[Mr Right]

My first year of coaching last year, have a small boy for his age first year of playing, technically can kick a ball, control, dribble etc. But in games, like playing with a player short, very timid, too scared to go in due to being intimidated by the 'bigger' boys, frustrating for me. He is a nice kid, get along with parents, parents love the coaching and club. Trials come along, 10 new players try out, all are better players. Will I keep the small kid, YES !!!! Thats just me. Would have the so called "bigger, richer" clubs that have 50-60 kids at trials, kept him. NO, I dont think so. Why, because they want to WIN !!!!

Hi Zeljko

Trials are the worst part of coaching in my opinion.

You've been very loyal to the "small boy" by keeping him but look at it another way and how loyal have you been to the other players in the team by not taking a better player in his place? If you start loosing the other players maybe not this year, but next year because they can play on stronger teams would you still consider you made the right choice?

[johnydep]

Clubs, and coaches for the clubs need to ask themselves a question; "Is our task to build winning teams or developing the players?"

Because these are two very different things!

[Mr Right]

Clubs, and coaches for the clubs need to ask themselves a question; "Is our task to build winning teams or developing the players?"

Because these are two very different things!

But you can do both at the same time.

[mooroffside]

Johnny

Could you please explain the difference, in your view.

It appears to me that you are saying that winning teams aren't being developed, which might not be the case and loosing teams are being developed, again it might not be the case.

Beat me to it Mr Wright.

[johnydep]

Clubs, and coaches for the clubs need to ask themselves a question; "Is our task to build winning teams or developing the players?"

Because these are two very different things!

But you can do both at the same time.

Did you see the State National Championships? Have you seen the DVD Player Development Philosophy by GEORGIA SOCCER?

Both examples show what happens when winning becomes the first priority.

Coaches obsessed with building the strongest team to win every game are not developing players. Just look at our professional levels, why are we importing so many players? Because we don't have enough players that can entertain the fans, spectators don’t want to see game like we saw at the Nationals. Without fans there is no A-League, with no A-League we go back to part time footballers.

The players have to be developed from the junior levels, forget about building a winning team, build a team of players that are dedicated, willing to learn and loyal. Then build in them a soccer brain, skills, technique and class.

At junior level the coach should develop each and every player, with each age group becoming more complex and preparing for adult competition.

[johnydep]

Johnny

Could you please explain the difference, in your view.

It appears to me that you are saying that winning teams aren't being developed, which might not be the case and loosing teams are being developed, again it might not be the case.

Beat me to it Mr Wright.

Nothing wrong with winning, as long as it is not the first priority!

Development of the player should be the first priority!

[mooroffside]

Now you have phrased it like that, I totally agree. It's not about winning at all costs, but about developing the players you have got.

Which brings us back to the original post, of what needs to be done to get the FFA, FFSA, clubs and coaches to change the methods of coaching of youngsters in this country, so it matches what you have said.

[Mr Right]

Clubs, and coaches for the clubs need to ask themselves a question; "Is our task to build winning teams or developing the players?"

Because these are two very different things!

But you can do both at the same time.

Did you see the State National Championships? Have you seen the DVD Player Development Philosophy by GEORGIA SOCCER?

Both examples show what happens when winning becomes the first priority.

Coaches obsessed with building the strongest team to win every game are not developing players. Just look at our professional levels, why are we importing so many players? Because we don't have enough players that can entertain the fans, spectators don’t want to see game like we saw at the Nationals. Without fans there is no A-League, with no A-League we go back to part time footballers.

The players have to be developed from the junior levels, forget about building a winning team, build a team of players that are dedicated, willing to learn and loyal. Then build in them a soccer brain, skills, technique and class.

At junior level the coach should develop each and every player, with each age group becoming more complex and preparing for adult competition.

Didn't see the State Championships but have seen the Georgia DVD.

State Championships are just that - Championships - to find the champions, it's all about winning. Our best play your best. The "best" should be the ones who have been "developed".

I agree that coaches who are obsessed with building the strongest team to win every game are not necessarily developing players.

Regarding importing players, previously we have not had the soccer population numbers to produce a large number of great players in the past compared to countries like brazil who have a lot more players and hence a larger number of "great " players.

I also agree players have to be developed from the junior levels.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to win, it is built in to the human psyche, it is when winning at all costs becomes more dominant than developing that the problems occur.

[mooroffside]

Johnnydep

I have just sat down and watched the Georgia video.

I think the video highlights of the standard in coaching in the USA, more than how wonderful Brazilian soccer is. Yes it is wonderful, but it's very easy to say ooh look at this standard of football, isn't it fantastic. Where are the other team they are playing from, they are from Brazil, unless they were Columbians bused in for the day. So not every Brazilian team is full of Ronaldos etc.

Georgia soccer seem to blame everybody but themselves. The parents, the coaches, even the players are blamed. (sounds like Fozzie?) The guy on the video has even produced a document called the GA soccer manual. In this document he says this and that, but doesn't say anything about the actual coaching. In fact he says playing daylong tournaments is bad for the kids, yet their website lists many of them, yet no coaching advice anywhere on this site.

The video only exposes the weakness in American coaching. Having read the american coaching manual, which personally I think is aimed at the Soccer MOM or "kicking and Screaming" soccer coach, I think it was page 64 before they actually said anything interesting. So there's no surprise that the standard is like that. Not having a go at soccer mom's or anyone that puts their hand up before anyone starts.

I think the video actually says that the biggest problem it has in America are problems due to having no strength, depth or history of professional clubs. Also it's a melting pot of ideas due to it's diverse background, is another reason of why it's struggling.

Can we draw a similar parallel with Australia?

[johnydep]

Johnnydep

I have just sat down and watched the Georgia video.

....

Can we draw a similar parallel with Australia?

Yes!

The Brazilians do it differently. Their junior games are based on futsal, competitions as we know it does not start in Brail until the U13's. Parents don't pay too much attention to the games, so there is no screaming from the side line to "kick the ball", "shoot", "Pass it". No out-side pressure, the kids develop a 'soccer brain' and learn to keep possesion.

Go to any game in Australia and you'll hear either the coach or parents screaming out instructions.

If you check out the top European soccer nations you'll see that none use our system (which is similar to the US).
Even we are changing the way it's done; http://www.ausport.gov.au/junior/jsf/do ... _NJFP2.ppt

[Željko Jurin]

My first year of coaching last year, have a small boy for his age first year of playing, technically can kick a ball, control, dribble etc. But in games, like playing with a player short, very timid, too scared to go in due to being intimidated by the 'bigger' boys, frustrating for me. He is a nice kid, get along with parents, parents love the coaching and club. Trials come along, 10 new players try out, all are better players. Will I keep the small kid, YES !!!! Thats just me. Would have the so called "bigger, richer" clubs that have 50-60 kids at trials, kept him. NO, I dont think so. Why, because they want to WIN !!!!

Hi Zeljko

Trials are the worst part of coaching in my opinion.

You've been very loyal to the "small boy" by keeping him but look at it another way and how loyal have you been to the other players in the team by not taking a better player in his place? If you start loosing the other players maybe not this year, but next year because they can play on stronger teams would you still consider you made the right choice?[/quote]

So you're saying dont give the kid ANY chance to develop, as we will have a weaker team, who will not win as many games as we 'might' have. But what I'm saying is as long as I'm doing the right and the kids are developing and improving, we should ALL be happy; coach, club, player and parents

Mr Right, you have got that 'winning' thing which we are all discussing that needs changing

[Mr Right]

My first year of coaching last year, have a small boy for his age first year of playing, technically can kick a ball, control, dribble etc. But in games, like playing with a player short, very timid, too scared to go in due to being intimidated by the 'bigger' boys, frustrating for me. He is a nice kid, get along with parents, parents love the coaching and club. Trials come along, 10 new players try out, all are better players. Will I keep the small kid, YES !!!! Thats just me. Would have the so called "bigger, richer" clubs that have 50-60 kids at trials, kept him. NO, I dont think so. Why, because they want to WIN !!!!

Hi Zeljko

Trials are the worst part of coaching in my opinion.

You've been very loyal to the "small boy" by keeping him but look at it another way and how loyal have you been to the other players in the team by not taking a better player in his place? If you start loosing the other players maybe not this year, but next year because they can play on stronger teams would you still consider you made the right choice?[/quote]

So you're saying dont give the kid ANY chance to develop, as we will have a weaker team, who will not win as many games as we 'might' have. But what I'm saying is as long as I'm doing the right and the kids are developing and improving, we should ALL be happy; coach, club, player and parents

Mr Right, you have got that 'winning' thing which we are all discussing that needs changing

[/quote]

Zeljko

I am all for development first ahead of winning.

I did ask you to look at what you have done from another point of view as you don't seem to have looked too far beyond that player, this year. You kept the player and good on you but the other parents/players may not necessarily see it so and won't end up ALL happy. My question again is, "If you start loosing the other players maybe not this year, but next year because they can play on stronger teams would you still consider you made the right choice?"