Formations

Last year I think I recognized three formations used in U13: 4-4-2 with a sweeper, 3-5-2, and 4-3-3. I’m sure there were other formations used that I didn’t recognize. (It’s hard to tell from the sidelines.)

I’m curious: does anyone have an opinion on which formations are most commonly used at this age level? Or, on which formations should be used? Why do coaches choose the formations they do?

Also, how much difference do formations make? If two teams are evenly matched, could the choice of formation make the difference between winning and losing? Do coaches ever switch formations at halftime, or for a rematch?

Finally, do boys and girls teams at U13-U14 generally use the same formations?

(Everything I know about formations, I learned from wikipedia. ;))

A lot of teams even at earlier ages (say U14's) are going to the flat back 4. It takes time and you will have a learning curve. Most colleges use it, so it is worth while to get used to it. I believe the Scorporions made it a requirement around a year ago but I could be wrong.

All Stars teams play a flat back 4 execpt for the u13's rising u14's. No stopper sweeper at that club.

[Cujo]

All Stars teams play a flat back 4 execpt for the u13's rising u14's. No stopper sweeper at that club.

That is a good age to implement it. Players need to have some tactical mastery and lots of technical mastery to be able to give enough thought to maintaining the flat back 4 shape. Coaches also need to be visual when describing as being verbal is either confusing or misleading.

On the other point I think 4-4-2 is probably the dominant formation from what I have seen, with 4-3-3 and 3-5-2 in 2nd. With my older players HS or U17/18 I might use three different formations in a game on occassion depending on what the other team is presenting and/or what the score is. In a 2-0 game I might even switch to a single forward with 9 mids and D.

A lot of teams even at earlier ages (say U14's) are going to the flat back 4. It takes time and you will have a learning curve. Most colleges use it, so it is worth while to get used to it. I believe the Scorporions made it a requirement around a year ago but I could be wrong.

So those teams presumably spend more time practicing defense than other teams do, at least at the beginning. I wonder how they train--is there a lot of shadow play involved? And do defenders generally have to be faster in this system, without a sweeper to back them up?

[Cujo]

A lot of teams even at earlier ages (say U14's) are going to the flat back 4. It takes time and you will have a learning curve. Most colleges use it, so it is worth while to get used to it. I believe the Scorporions made it a requirement around a year ago but I could be wrong.

So those teams presumably spend more time practicing defense than other teams do, at least at the beginning. I wonder how they train--is there a lot of shadow play involved? And do defenders generally have to be faster in this system, without a sweeper to back them up?

I think speed and quickness are essential on D no matter what system that you play. Having slow lumbering strong footed defenders is a weakness that well balanced teams will exploit in a heartbeat. Several of my HS opponents would always put these type of players on outside defense and it is one of the easiest trends to exploit when attacking.

In a 2-0 game I might even switch to a single forward with 9 mids and D.

You mean like a 4-5-1, like England has used in World Cup? Is that thought of primarily as a defensive formation?

[Cujo]

In a 2-0 game I might even switch to a single forward with 9 mids and D.

You mean like a 4-5-1, like England has used in World Cup? Is that thought of primarily as a defensive formation?

yes - I meant with a 2-0 lead, down 2-0 with 10 minutes to go you gotta put lots of bodies in the risk zone.

I particularly like the oft-used in MAPLE 8-1-1

In a 2-0 game I might even switch to a single forward with 9 mids and D.

You mean like a 4-5-1, like England has used in World Cup? Is that thought of primarily as a defensive formation?

yes - I meant with a 2-0 lead, down 2-0 with 10 minutes to go you gotta put lots of bodies in the risk zone.

In one HS game, I saw Winchester protect a one-goal lead late in the game with what looked like a flat-back five or even six--I lost count. The field was also lined for football, and the defenders were aligned on a certain yard line, I forget which. The other team had a lot of trouble getting through balls through.

There are also variations within the numbers. For example, a 4-4-2 can be VERY different from a 4-4-2 depending on whether your defense or mid fielders (or both) play flat or diamond. Similarly I think you will find almost no differences in application between a 3-5-2 and a 4-4-2 (sweeper/stopper) if the coach requires the central defender to play behind the outside defenders -which at younger ages tends to happen naturally. The main difference is that a stopper is generally man to man on a striker whereas a sitting center mid will be playing zonal defense - almost like a rover back - in front of the defensive line. It is interesting that a couple of the people who had commented on other threads about the Stars now U-15s formation found it impossible to determine beyond 3 or 4 backs what they were doing. Having watched them a couple of times it looked like they always played a flat 4 and would generally have a 4 diamond midfield witha roving defensive center middie and an attacking center middie but the outside middies spent lots of time pushed up in the offensive third and certainly when the attacking CM took possession the 2 strikers and 2 outside Mids would work in concert looking to attack. I also saw a 4-3-3 in which with the midfielders and strikers were allowed to overlap from sideline to sideline. I mention them only because they are a very well coached team with players that seem to grasp beyond the "normal" 14 YO when it comes to tactics and they tend to really spread the field out with their shape.

There are also variations within the numbers. For example, a 4-4-2 can be VERY different from a 4-4-2 depending on whether your defense or mid fielders (or both) play flat or diamond. Similarly I think you will find almost no differences in application between a 3-5-2 and a 4-4-2 (sweeper/stopper) if the coach requires the central defender to play behind the outside defenders -which at younger ages tends to happen naturally. The main difference is that a stopper is generally man to man on a striker whereas a sitting center mid will be playing zonal defense - almost like a rover back - in front of the defensive line. It is interesting that a couple of the people who had commented on other threads about the Stars now U-15s formation found it impossible to determine beyond 3 or 4 backs what they were doing. Having watched them a couple of times it looked like they always played a flat 4 and would generally have a 4 diamond midfield witha roving defensive center middie and an attacking center middie but the outside middies spent lots of time pushed up in the offensive third and certainly when the attacking CM took possession the 2 strikers and 2 outside Mids would work in concert looking to attack. I also saw a 4-3-3 in which with the midfielders and strikers were allowed to overlap from sideline to sideline. I mention them only because they are a very well coached team with players that seem to grasp beyond the "normal" 14 YO when it comes to tactics and they tend to really spread the field out with their shape.

Thank you for the great post. Just a few comments regarding the underlined parts. One, it has struck me in the past how the central D in a 3-5-2 can play very much like a sweeper, even with the Revs. Two, as a parent, I often find it extremely difficult to figure out from the sidelines what a team is doing formation-wise. Occasionally a venue will have a higher vantage point, and then things start becoming clearer.

Three, thanks for that description, I have seen that Stars team play and that attack is devastating, if that's the right word.

[JustForFun]

Cujo writes:

In a 2-0 game I might even switch to a single forward with 9 mids and D.

Cujo now we know that you used to coach for the Hamlets! :D :D :D As for your high school so-called soccer strategies - please spare me the pathetic self-indulgence of your puny egotistical exploits.

Kazimieirz wrote:

an attacking center middie but the outside middies spent lots of time pushed up in the offensive third and certainly when the attacking CM took possession the 2 strikers and 2 outside Mids would work in concert looking to attack. I also saw a 4-3-3 in which with the midfielders and strikers were allowed to overlap from sideline to sideline.

Guest writes:

Three, thanks for that description, I have seen that Stars team play and that attack is devastating, if that's the right word.

Devastating? Or foolish? There is a reason that most coaches do not attack with 4 players. In one word - counterattack. Look back at the commentary from Texas about the switch by the Stars to a 4-3-3 in the second half, and their extended attack, which was negated by the associated Texas counterattack. The 4, 5 and 6 person attack works well at U11 to U15, but not after that. Why? Because the older kids do not understand the formation movement as well as the 14/15 year old girl's Stars team? Or because long-term such flagrantly offensive formations lead to counterattacks that cost the match? The 4, 5 and 6 player attack formations by the Stars is a "look good" short-term strategy.

[JustForFun]

Kazimieirz writes:

Similarly I think you will find almost no differences in application between a 3-5-2 and a 4-4-2 (sweeper/stopper) if the coach requires the central defender to play behind the outside defenders -which at younger ages tends to happen naturally.

I am not sure what this means. What is the difference between a 4-4-2 Flat Back Four formation and a 4-4-2 Sweeper/Stopper formation? When the Forward attacks down the middle one of the Central Defenders has to step and conversely the other Central Defender drops. Now the Flat Back Four is a Sweeper/Stopper? Therefore you will find almost no difference in application of a Flat Back Four and a Sweeper/Stopper?

I think there is a big difference between a 4-4-2 Flat Back Four formation and a 4-4-2 Sweeper/ Stopper formation. I also think there is a big difference between a 3-5-2 and a 4-4-2. Are there big differences or almost no difference in application? A 4-3-3 formation with one Forward falling back to support and assist the attack of the other 2 Forwards is no different than a 4-4-2? I think there is a difference in the flexibility of the defense or the attack with the flexibility allowing the defense to adjust and the attack to confuse. Possibly the point being made is that it is difficult for most on the sidelines to discern the difference because most can't see the game that well? Possibly the poster was being diplomatic?

Three, thanks for that description, I have seen that Stars team play and that attack is devastating, if that's the right word.

Devastating? Or foolish? There is a reason that most coaches do not attack with 4 players. In one word - counterattack. Look back at the commentary from Texas about the switch by the Stars to a 4-3-3 in the second half, and their extended attack, which was negated by the associated Texas counterattack. The 4, 5 and 6 person attack works well at U11 to U15, but not after that. Why? Because the older kids do not understand the formation movement as well as the 14/15 year old girl's Stars team? Or because long-term such flagrantly offensive formations lead to counterattacks that cost the match? The 4, 5 and 6 player attack formations by the Stars is a "look good" short-term strategy.

Cool analysis, but maybe you're being a little harsh? The Stars attack was certainly devastating in Mass., Region 1, and the first round of the Nationals. And then the Stars were able to switch to a 4-3-3 at the half against one of the best teams in the country and hang in? Well, that's cool, too.

JustForFun also wrote:
I think there is a big difference between a 4-4-2 Flat Back Four formation and a 4-4-2 Sweeper/ Stopper formation. I also think there is a big difference between a 3-5-2 and a 4-4-2. Are there big differences or almost no difference in application?... Possibly the point being made is that it is difficult for most on the sidelines to discern the difference because most can't see the game that well? Possibly the poster was being diplomatic?

Possibly the poster was being diplomatic, but if so, it's OK, there's no need to be diplomatic--I admit I'm pretty dumb, and I'm just an anonymous guest anyway. :) For me, games are generally comprehensible from the top of the bleachers or on TV, but far less so from the sidelines. Possibly that's because I don't understand the game well. Anyway, interesting posts, JFF.

There is a significant difference between a flat back four and a sweeper stopper. I said that. The point is that superficially we call both a 4-4-2. So as a novice or not so novice if you tell me your team plays a 4-4-2 it really isn't sayong much. As for the difference between the 3-5-2 and sweeper stopper 4-4-2, the point is that at younger ages this tends to naturally "evolve" on field into the same shape and with the same responsibilities - with the middle defender assuming the role of sweeper and a defensive mid-fielder playing stopper. Add to this that with most 14 and under teams (especially girls) only about a 1/2 of the field space is used so the compressed shape further frustrates differences in formation. As for the attack of both the strikers and outside middies in the 4-4-2 (Stars or otherwise) -What it does do is put a lot of pressure on the outside midies to run the entire field and they have significant offensive and defensive responsibilities. what I saw that team do quite well - better than any other team in this state - was recognize when they gained possession in the middle and get those outside middies into the attack and it was an attack that featured lots of cutting and weaving, not just lane play. Certainly there are teams that emphasize the defensive responsibilities of the OMs. This can certainly make it an easier way to get 8 behind the ball. JFFs point does show that the idea held by many parents - that the 4-3-3 is a more "offensive" formation than the 4-4-2 -is pretty absurd. Its all about the use of the OMs. By the way, where does Renaldo play again?

Good God, he's talking to himself again.

[Cujo]

Cujo writes:

[quote]In a 2-0 game I might even switch to a single forward with 9 mids and D.

Cujo now we know that you used to coach for the Hamlets! :D :D :D As for your high school so-called soccer strategies - please spare me the pathetic self-indulgence of your puny egotistical exploits.

Kazimieirz wrote:

an attacking center middie but the outside middies spent lots of time pushed up in the offensive third and certainly when the attacking CM took possession the 2 strikers and 2 outside Mids would work in concert looking to attack. I also saw a 4-3-3 in which with the midfielders and strikers were allowed to overlap from sideline to sideline.

Guest writes:

Three, thanks for that description, I have seen that Stars team play and that attack is devastating, if that's the right word.

Devastating? Or foolish? There is a reason that most coaches do not attack with 4 players. In one word - counterattack. Look back at the commentary from Texas about the switch by the Stars to a 4-3-3 in the second half, and their extended attack, which was negated by the associated Texas counterattack. The 4, 5 and 6 person attack works well at U11 to U15, but not after that. Why? Because the older kids do not understand the formation movement as well as the 14/15 year old girl's Stars team? Or because long-term such flagrantly offensive formations lead to counterattacks that cost the match? The 4, 5 and 6 player attack formations by the Stars is a "look good" short-term strategy.[/quote:1cbg45jr]

1 billion stars in 1 billion galaxies.... isn't everything puny?? :cry:

As for the difference between the 3-5-2 and sweeper stopper 4-4-2, the point is that at younger ages this tends to naturally "evolve" on field into the same shape and with the same responsibilities - with the middle defender assuming the role of sweeper and a defensive mid-fielder playing stopper.
interesting point

Add to this that with most 14 and under teams (especially girls) only about a 1/2 of the field space is used so the compressed shape further frustrates differences in formation.
good point

As for the attack of both the strikers and outside middies in the 4-4-2 (Stars or otherwise) -What it does do is put a lot of pressure on the outside midies to run the entire field and they have significant offensive and defensive responsibilities.
yes

what I saw [the Stars U14G] team do quite well - better than any other team in this state - was recognize when they gained possession in the middle and get those outside middies into the attack and it was an attack that featured lots of cutting and weaving, not just lane play.
yes!

[JustForFun]

Cujo writes:

1 billion stars in 1 billion galaxies.... isn't everything puny??

It was a joke. You were complaining in another thread that Mr. Stats was not harrassing you about high school so-called soccer comments, and since I am Mr. Stats, hence the comment. If you took insult please accept my apology - I tried to make the comment overly harsh so you would recognize it as a joke. I am guessing that you did not - maybe it was a bad joke, or a three beer joke?

And yes - everything is puny!

[Cujo]

Cujo writes:

1 billion stars in 1 billion galaxies.... isn't everything puny??

It was a joke. You were complaining in another thread that Mr. Stats was not harrassing you about high school so-called soccer comments, and since I am Mr. Stats, hence the comment. If you took insult please accept my apology - I tried to make the comment overly harsh so you would recognize it as a joke. I am guessing that you did not - maybe it was a bad joke, or a three beer joke?

And yes - everything is puny!

Not offended, just philosophical. One of the reasons that I like the 4-4-2 is that it facilitates teaching good defensive shape without using the diamond shape with the stopper/sweeper. Running a diamond on both mid and d is not a good use of your numbers. You tend to get holes and bunching in the various parts of the field. The flat 4 (I hate the word flat) really forces players to focus on what the offense is doing and how their teammates are reacting and positioning themselves on the field. I find that it forces them to think a little more.

[JustForFun]

Guest writes:

Possibly the poster was being diplomatic, but if so, it's OK, there's no need to be diplomatic--I admit I'm pretty dumb, and I'm just an anonymous guest anyway.

We are all pretty dumb when we have not played the game and learned from experience. That does not make people who have learned from experience smart, but possbily have more understanding. I am guessing you did not play soccer as a kid or in college, so that does not make you dumb, just a novice. Novices are not dumb, they are just novices. We are all novices in various aspects of life because we can not all learn everything - with the singular exception of my partner who knows ...........

As for being an anonymous guest, it would be great if you would register - it is painless, only takes a few minutes and helps in the continuity of the forum and thread.

Guest writes:

Cool analysis, but maybe you're being a little harsh? The Stars attack was certainly devastating in Mass., Region 1, and the first round of the Nationals. And then the Stars were able to switch to a 4-3-3 at the half against one of the best teams in the country and hang in? Well, that's cool, too.

I think you misunderstood. I think the Stars' team is a great team and I am sure they are a great group of kids. What was the cummulative scores of their Round Robin play this year? 22-1, 24-1? That is devastating? I can not agree. I think it is poor sportsmanship. After a team is ahead 3-0 or 4-0, play 10 on 11 or 9 on 11. That way the team is stretched - the kids have to play through double teams, hustle more to recover from a mistake, etc. In the Round Robin beating a Hamlets team 8 or 10 to 0, in the heavy heat after the Hamlets had two injuries and a medical situation and had one or no subs left? That is a devastating attack? I was harsh? If my kid's coach ever did that I would complain after the game. Humiliating a group of kids for no reason - that, in my opinion, is harsh.

A lot of teams play that way in MA. The Scorps regularly beat teams at the younger ages by double digits. What is the point? The team has maintained it formation and style and that is what happens? I find it distressing and upsetting. I am harsh? When I was growing up we used to play behind a kids house up the street. When the score was lopsided, we the kids, would change the makeupof the teams (repick sides) so the game could be closer and more fun. Now we have adults picking the kids to play, and IMHO, there lacks some decency.

[JustForFun]

Kazimierz writes:

at younger ages this tends to naturally "evolve" on field into the same shape and with the same responsibilities - with the middle defender assuming the role of sweeper and a defensive mid-fielder playing stopper.

I agree with you but think this is a stretch. My experience is that it depends on the kid. Some run forward, some hang back, a 4-4-2 and 3-5-2 can be all confused based on the personnel. They are just kids.

I am somewhat confused. The Stars attack with the OMs, and they are unique in that - if I understand correctly. So other teams have 8 back behind the ball because the OMs don't attack - if I understand correctly. But if the teams have 8 back, then the Stars pushing 4 forward to attack the 8 defenders is devastating?

Kazimeirz writes:

was recognize when they gained possession in the middle and get those outside middies into the attack and it was an attack that featured lots of cutting and weaving, not just lane play.

Yes I agree. I understand that the Stars team practices formation movement - it is only my understanding becuase I have no first hand knowledge. I think it is pretty unusual to start fromation movement at this young of an age. It is usually referred to as a Situational exercise or practice. In other words they are taught how to change fields and cut and weave. It is fun to watch, but my experience is that at 14 it is not a natural progression to play in this manner. It has been taught and trained with a lot of time and effort. What happens at U16 and U17 when the other girls naturally progress to the stage where they comprehend the formation movement implications? Do the trained teams continue to excel? Or does the situational training simply make a younger team more advanced and successful at a younger age? Personally I would prefer my kids to continue to work on skills and touches at 14, and work on formational movement at U16 or U17 when kids comprehend it more easily.

Guest writes:

[quote]Possibly the poster was being diplomatic, but if so, it's OK, there's no need to be diplomatic--I admit I'm pretty dumb, and I'm just an anonymous guest anyway.

We are all pretty dumb when we have not played the game and learned from experience. That does not make people who have learned from experience smart, but possbily have more understanding. I am guessing you did not play soccer as a kid or in college, so that does not make you dumb, just a novice. Novices are not dumb, they are just novices. We are all novices in various aspects of life because we can not all learn everything - with the singular exception of my partner who knows ...........

As for being an anonymous guest, it would be great if you would register - it is painless, only takes a few minutes and helps in the continuity of the forum and thread.

Guest writes:

Cool analysis, but maybe you're being a little harsh? The Stars attack was certainly devastating in Mass., Region 1, and the first round of the Nationals. And then the Stars were able to switch to a 4-3-3 at the half against one of the best teams in the country and hang in? Well, that's cool, too.

I think you misunderstood. I think the Stars' team is a great team and I am sure they are a great group of kids. What was the cummulative scores of their Round Robin play this year? 22-1, 24-1? That is devastating? I can not agree. I think it is poor sportsmanship. After a team is ahead 3-0 or 4-0, play 10 on 11 or 9 on 11. That way the team is stretched - the kids have to play through double teams, hustle more to recover from a mistake, etc. In the Round Robin beating a Hamlets team 8 or 10 to 0, in the heavy heat after the Hamlets had two injuries and a medical situation and had one or no subs left? That is a devastating attack? I was harsh? If my kid's coach ever did that I would complain after the game. Humiliating a group of kids for no reason - that, in my opinion, is harsh.

A lot of teams play that way in MA. The Scorps regularly beat teams at the younger ages by double digits. What is the point? The team has maintained it formation and style and that is what happens? I find it distressing and upsetting. I am harsh? When I was growing up we used to play behind a kids house up the street. When the score was lopsided, we the kids, would change the makeupof the teams (repick sides) so the game could be closer and more fun. Now we have adults picking the kids to play, and IMHO, there lacks some decency.[/quote:1kyvwpht]

The Stars team is devastating/impressive/great ... all of the above. They would be with various formations. Bottom line, they have great and motivated talent. When they pulled the National pool player from the U15s down to the U14s last year and added some other talent from other clubs, they became devastating! Ultimately, without the best talent, formations/coaching can onlhy do so much.

Coaching is important, formations are important, but great talent is priceless.

Ultimately, without the best talent, formations/coaching can onlhy do so much.

Coaching is important, formations are important, but great talent is priceless.

Point well taken. But I hope we can continue to talk about formations on this thread! :)

One of the reasons that I like the 4-4-2 is that it facilitates teaching good defensive shape without using the diamond shape with the stopper/sweeper. Running a diamond on both mid and d is not a good use of your numbers. You tend to get holes and bunching in the various parts of the field.
yes!

Jason has just added the other Regional player from the u15's rising 16's down to his group(age appropriate). The strong just keep getting stronger. Talk about a developmental feeder pool. I think this must be the 3rd or 4th player that has been playing on the age above and has moved down to age specific. All at different times so I wonder how they make the decision to move down? Only Jason would know right ;)
Maybe adding this player is down to the performance at Nationals and it was something his team was lacking.

Jason has just added the other Regional player from the u15's rising 16's down to his group(age appropriate). The strong just keep getting stronger. Talk about a developmental feeder pool. I think this must be the 3rd or 4th player that has been playing on the age above and has moved down to age specific. All at different times so I wonder how they make the decision to move down? Only Jason would know right ;)
Maybe adding this player is down to the performance at Nationals and it was something his team was lacking.

I think there are several Regional players on the rising 16s so I'm sure that some still remain. In addition, I think they have added a top midfielder from rising U16 Scorps so the rising 16s will be just fine, too.

[JustForFun]

Guest writes:

Coaching is important, formations are important, but great talent is priceless.

Yes but priceless talent can lose with bad coaching and poor formations. The coach has done a great job with a great group of girls.

[sccrdad]

Guest writes:

[quote]Possibly the poster was being diplomatic, but if so, it's OK, there's no need to be diplomatic--I admit I'm pretty dumb, and I'm just an anonymous guest anyway.

We are all pretty dumb when we have not played the game and learned from experience. That does not make people who have learned from experience smart, but possbily have more understanding. I am guessing you did not play soccer as a kid or in college, so that does not make you dumb, just a novice. Novices are not dumb, they are just novices. We are all novices in various aspects of life because we can not all learn everything - with the singular exception of my partner who knows ...........

As for being an anonymous guest, it would be great if you would register - it is painless, only takes a few minutes and helps in the continuity of the forum and thread.

Guest writes:

Cool analysis, but maybe you're being a little harsh? The Stars attack was certainly devastating in Mass., Region 1, and the first round of the Nationals. And then the Stars were able to switch to a 4-3-3 at the half against one of the best teams in the country and hang in? Well, that's cool, too.

I think you misunderstood. I think the Stars' team is a great team and I am sure they are a great group of kids. What was the cummulative scores of their Round Robin play this year? 22-1, 24-1? That is devastating? I can not agree. I think it is poor sportsmanship. After a team is ahead 3-0 or 4-0, play 10 on 11 or 9 on 11. That way the team is stretched - the kids have to play through double teams, hustle more to recover from a mistake, etc. In the Round Robin beating a Hamlets team 8 or 10 to 0, in the heavy heat after the Hamlets had two injuries and a medical situation and had one or no subs left? That is a devastating attack? I was harsh? If my kid's coach ever did that I would complain after the game. Humiliating a group of kids for no reason - that, in my opinion, is harsh.

A lot of teams play that way in MA. The Scorps regularly beat teams at the younger ages by double digits. What is the point? The team has maintained it formation and style and that is what happens? I find it distressing and upsetting. I am harsh? When I was growing up we used to play behind a kids house up the street. When the score was lopsided, we the kids, would change the makeupof the teams (repick sides) so the game could be closer and more fun. Now we have adults picking the kids to play, and IMHO, there lacks some decency.[/quote:2pjbsapo]

You are harsh. This is the RR of the state cup, not just a friendly. The Stars team is trained to compete at the highest level and that is not easy to turn off. Also, what about the kids coming off the bench who get chances to score. Are they to be penalized because the other team is inferior, or do they get to score and get rewarded for their work?

I challenge you to provide some scores where Scorps have run up double digit scores. If you can find any from the Maple website I would like to see the list. Having competed against them I have always found them fair.

I bet you don't like dodgeball or playing tag either.

[JustForFun]

sccrdad writes:

Also, what about the kids coming off the bench who get chances to score. Are they to be penalized because the other team is inferior, or do they get to score and get rewarded for their work?

If the other team is inferior (curious choice of words from someone who thinks I am harsh), why can't the kids coming off the bench start? Is scoring that important? The feelings of the child scoring greatly outwiegh the feelings of the kids being devastated? If a kid works hard they have a right to score to fulfill their work ethic independent of the effort and feelings of the other participants in the match?

The Stars team is trained to compete at the highest level and that is not easy to turn off.

Especially if no adult ever tries to teach restraint and respect. Restraint and respect in a match is referred to as Sportsmanship.

I challenge you to provide some scores where Scorps have run up double digit scores.

It was not in MAPLE it was at a tournament. Sorry if you spent a lot of time looking at the MAPLE scores from the last few years. Some of us have been around for awhile. Maybe Scorps are acting differently in the last few years. If so, GREAT!

[Cujo]

sccrdad writes:

[quote]Also, what about the kids coming off the bench who get chances to score. Are they to be penalized because the other team is inferior, or do they get to score and get rewarded for their work?

If the other team is inferior (curious choice of words from someone who thinks I am harsh), why can't the kids coming off the bench start? Is scoring that important? The feelings of the child scoring greatly outwiegh the feelings of the kids being devastated? If a kid works hard they have a right to score to fulfill their work ethic independent of the effort and feelings of the other participants in the match?

The Stars team is trained to compete at the highest level and that is not easy to turn off.



Especially if no adult ever tries to teach restraint and respect. Restraint and respect in a match is referred to as Sportsmanship.

I challenge you to provide some scores where Scorps have run up double digit scores.

It was not in MAPLE it was at a tournament. Sorry if you spent a lot of time looking at the MAPLE scores from the last few years. Some of us have been around for awhile. Maybe Scorps are acting differently in the last few years. If so, GREAT![/quote:3l7vgs1b]

I would actually rather have my team's a$s kicked 21-0 than to have a team pull the "we are so good we can score with our left foot or we can play keep away for nine hours" bullsh!t.............

One of the greatest tools available to a coach regarding formation is when you can find a high vantage point behind one's own goal and film the game from that angle. Unfortunately there are few facilities offering this option, but the new field one at Lancaster does!! If you get a chance to watch a game from up there you will find a few nearly universal things. First is that teams rarely spread out across the entire width of the field. Part of that is because the ball tends to act as a magnet - especially at younger ages. Also, with younger boys and almost all girls there is a strength issue limiting the number of 35 yard point to point cross passes that can quickly change fields and keep defenses honest. But true shape is frustrated by this horizontal compression. Second is that defenses almost all sag too deep and strikers rarely stay up on the last defender (further frustrating appropriate shape). Third, movement away from the ball, although one of the most critical elements of the game, is almost stagnent except for a few predictable runs along the outside or simple "give and goes" in the middle. Finally, a lot of teams that play a so-called ball control style, do so with absolutely no purpose at all. It is keep away for the sake of keep away - no build up, no attempt to gain a territorial advantage and no great desire to actually force an offensive chance.

[JustForFun]

Cujo writes:

I would actually rather have my team's a$s kicked 21-0 than to have a team pull the "we are so good we can score with our left foot or we can play keep away for nine hours" bullsh!t.............

I advocated playing 10 on 11, or 9 on 11. Keep the match competitive, keep the kids in a useful formation and balance the competition so that the game is still played in the normal fashion. I agree that just kicking the ball around or using the left foot is painful as well. It is easy to sub one or two kids out - some spectators don't even notice that there wasn't a corresponding sub back in - and the game is much more spirited and instructive to all without being an embarrassment to anyone. If the game is 4-0 or 5-0 I have even seen one team line up with 9 or 10 players to start the second half and heard parents comment on how much better their team is doing in the second half, without realizing they are up 1 or 2 players. ;) ;) ;)

[JustForFun]

Kazimierz writes:

One of the greatest tools available to a coach regarding formation is when you can find a high vantage point behind one's own goal and film the game from that angle.

I agree. My question, or point was, that certain concepts, like spreading the field, do develop naturally at the older ages. Is accelerating that development at 13 and 14 with high angle tapes real important? We can only teach so much. Should time be spent on formation movement or skills and control at 13 and 14? I am not really sure, but lean towards letting the kids learn skills and control at 13 and 14 and teach the formation movement at 16 and 17 when the kids understand it and learn it more quickly. Maybe I am completely wrong. I think FSM said that in Europe they stay with small sided practice areas until quite an advanced age, chosing to concentrate on skills and ball movement in tight spaces over formation movement.

I am afraid I am going to have to do it!!! Please FSM will you help me? Ouch that hurt!!!! :D :D :D

Cujo writes:

I would actually rather have my team's a$s kicked 21-0 than to have a team pull the "we are so good we can score with our left foot or we can play keep away for nine hours" bullsh!t.............

I advocated playing 10 on 11, or 9 on 11. Keep the match competitive, keep the kids in a useful formation and balance the competition so that the game is still played in the normal fashion. I agree that just kicking the ball around or using the left foot is painful as well. It is easy to sub one or two kids out - some spectators don't even notice that there wasn't a corresponding sub back in - and the game is much more spirited and instructive to all without being an embarrassment to anyone. If the game is 4-0 or 5-0 I have even seen one team line up with 9 or 10 players to start the second half and heard parents comment on how much better their team is doing in the second half, without realizing they are up 1 or 2 players. ;) ;) ;)

Ilya, I'm not sure that in a state cup round robin, premier league or regional play-off that teams would or should change what they normally do - even if that results in a 9-0 victory. There are those that believe that letting up in such a match actually shows disrespect to the opponent and the game. What is important is how you win 9-0, if it features lots of show-boating and attitude, then I would agree that it is in bad taste and unsportsmanlike. Frankly I have seen more of this when you tell a team to let up, even by removing players, than when a team simply goes about their business.

[JustForFun]

Ilya Gersh is in the house? On the same day as Mr. Stats? This is a hallowed day!

Guest writes:

Coaching is important, formations are important, but great talent is priceless.

Yes but priceless talent can lose with bad coaching and poor formations. The coach has done a great job with a great group of girls.


"I'm not looking for the best players, I'm lookin' for the right ones."

Cujo writes:

I would actually rather have my team's a$s kicked 21-0 than to have a team pull the "we are so good we can score with our left foot or we can play keep away for nine hours" bullsh!t.............

I advocated playing 10 on 11, or 9 on 11. Keep the match competitive, keep the kids in a useful formation and balance the competition so that the game is still played in the normal fashion. I agree that just kicking the ball around or using the left foot is painful as well. It is easy to sub one or two kids out - some spectators don't even notice that there wasn't a corresponding sub back in - and the game is much more spirited and instructive to all without being an embarrassment to anyone. If the game is 4-0 or 5-0 I have even seen one team line up with 9 or 10 players to start the second half and heard parents comment on how much better their team is doing in the second half, without realizing they are up 1 or 2 players. ;) ;) ;)



Seems reasonable. And before someone starts talking about goal differential effects, most tournaments limit the goal differential to something like 4 per game. Sometimes large goal differences are the result of frustration for the team. A parent on the rising U16 stars mentioned that their team went out to 'kick some but&" against Vermont in the Regionals (10 - 0, I think) after losing the first two games. They had no chance in the Regional at that point but it probably made them feel better about themselves and prepared for next year.

[FSM]

Coaching is important, formations are important, but great talent is priceless.



I would think by the time you reach the Nationals, the talent and the coaching are pretty close to equal, so how teams match across the field becomes an issue and this is where formations come into play. After all how did the Sting lose to Slammers 3-0 in their first game and then win 2-1 in the finals?

[FSM]

Ilya Gersh is back? Is the poster confusing JFF for Ilya??? :shock: Or is Ilya now going by the name Kazimierz?

[If the other team is inferior (curious choice of words from someone who thinks I am harsh), why can't the kids coming off the bench start? Is scoring that important? The feelings of the child scoring greatly outwiegh the feelings of the kids being devastated? If a kid works hard they have a right to score to fulfill their work ethic independent of the effort and feelings of the other participants in the match?

Especially if no adult ever tries to teach restraint and respect. Restraint and respect in a match is referred to as Sportsmanship.



A lot of coaches will take no pity on the Hamlets in similiar situations.

[JustForFun]

FSM - you are suppose to tell us! Not ask us!

[JustForFun]

Guest writes:

A lot of coaches will take no pity on the Hamlets in similiar situations.

No wonder it is hard to find a good coach.

Seems reasonable. And before someone starts talking about goal differential effects, most tournaments limit the goal differential to something like 4 per game. Sometimes large goal differences are the result of frustration for the team. A parent on the rising U16 stars mentioned that their team went out to 'kick some but&" against Vermont in the Regionals (10 - 0, I think) after losing the first two games. They had no chance in the Regional at that point but it probably made them feel better about themselves and prepared for next year.


Troll alert, Vermont lost the first 2 Regional games 10-0 so why jump on the Stars. Someone is bored

[sccrdad]

sccrdad writes:

[quote]Also, what about the kids coming off the bench who get chances to score. Are they to be penalized because the other team is inferior, or do they get to score and get rewarded for their work?

If the other team is inferior (curious choice of words from someone who thinks I am harsh), why can't the kids coming off the bench start? Is scoring that important? The feelings of the child scoring greatly outwiegh the feelings of the kids being devastated? If a kid works hard they have a right to score to fulfill their work ethic independent of the effort and feelings of the other participants in the match?

The Stars team is trained to compete at the highest level and that is not easy to turn off.

Especially if no adult ever tries to teach restraint and respect. Restraint and respect in a match is referred to as Sportsmanship.

I challenge you to provide some scores where Scorps have run up double digit scores.[/quote:3a7dscjm]

It was not in MAPLE it was at a tournament. Sorry if you spent a lot of time looking at the MAPLE scores from the last few years. Some of us have been around for awhile. Maybe Scorps are acting differently in the last few years. If so, GREAT![/quo

I have been around this soccer thing for a while also and I spent only a minute or two navigating the website( which I think is great by the way). Now I hope you can tell us the tournament where SC ran up scores.

I have seen my kids on the both ends of blowouts. I have played keepaway from teams and been lambasted by opposing teams for embarrassing them. I have also been attacked for running up a score even though I had kids playing new positions and not shooting with their strong foot. What I will not do is tell my kids too play softly or allow them to develop bad habits.

Last season I was on the business end of a rout and the opposing coach asked me if he wanted me to pull off his top 2 players( who were sublime and controlled he match), I said no-- they worked hard and were fun to watch. They should be allowed to play and not be penalized for their success. They are kids too.

Some of your other points are baffling. Do you really think the kids are devastated? They should not be, my kids never have been. And what if your child worked hard all season for one chance to get the goal that eluded him/her all year and then was told not to score? Would this player too be devastated? You also miss the point that you are responsible to your team first. If your player scoring a rare and special goal may make an opponent sad, so be it. The kid scoring the goal will remember the moment as special long after the other kid has forgotten it.

Life is not always fair, we are not all equal, and this is a great lesson for kids to learn early.

[FSM]

Kazimierz writes:

One of the greatest tools available to a coach regarding formation is when you can find a high vantage point behind one's own goal and film the game from that angle.

I agree. My question, or point was, that certain concepts, like spreading the field, do develop naturally at the older ages. Is accelerating that development at 13 and 14 with high angle tapes real important? We can only teach so much. Should time be spent on formation movement or skills and control at 13 and 14? I am not really sure, but lean towards letting the kids learn skills and control at 13 and 14 and teach the formation movement at 16 and 17 when the kids understand it and learn it more quickly. Maybe I am completely wrong. I think FSM said that in Europe they stay with small sided practice areas until quite an advanced age, chosing to concentrate on skills and ball movement in tight spaces over formation movement.

I am afraid I am going to have to do it!!! Please FSM will you help me? Ouch that hurt!!!! :D :D :D

I don't know that I can be of much help, but a good source to turn to if US Soccer's Best Practices http://www.mayouthsoccer.org/download/4 ... s_2005.pdf (http://www.mayouthsoccer.org/download/443_us_soccer_best_practices_2005.pdf). For this age group this is what I came up with as major points:

Two critical and interrelated themes in every practice should be recognizing when and how to get the ball out of pressure with the goal of getting forward and recognizing when and how to win the ball back, both as an individual and as a group. Games and exercises should be set up that encourage players to make decisions based on the cues and clues that exist in the game. Players should experience a variety of games, from 4 v 4 to 8 v 8...............

In training sessions play small-sided games with different demands and challenges. The games should be fast. To keep up with the speed of play, good technical ability and habits on and off the ball are necessary. The players need to stay tuned in mentally, to read the game, deal with the demands of the game, and to make decisions that help their team win. The goal is to help their personalities to grow and for them to begin to solve problems as a group. Therefore, give the players some freedom to make decisions, to solve problems, and to experiment with the game. Be more concerned with them developing into better players who can figure out how to win than with telling them exactly what to do.


GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WHAT SHOULD BE HAPPENING IN MATCHES:
Although the 13 and 14 year old begin to resemble adults, they are still far from a complete player. Players must continue to focus on individual and small group ideas. This can be accomplished by focusing on “the game within the game.â€￾ Find themes on which to focus that – when taken
together and accomplished with skill – add up to successful soccer. There should be some attention to organization, but the focus should be more on the smaller group relationships on the field, i.e., how the backs work together or how the backs work with the mid fielders, or how players can pressure the ball in 3’s and 4’s. The match continues to be the place for these players to develop their instincts for the game. Mistakes on the field should be errors of commission rather than errors of omission. It should not be the place for them to “play scaredâ€￾ or “safe.â€￾ Coaches should encourage big picture themes such as staying connected with the rest of the team, as well as more focused idea like encouraging players to find ways to get past opponents – either individually or in groups.

I agree. My question, or point was, that certain concepts, like spreading the field, do develop naturally at the older ages. Is accelerating that development at 13 and 14 with high angle tapes real important? We can only teach so much. Should time be spent on formation movement or skills and control at 13 and 14? I am not really sure, but lean towards letting the kids learn skills and control at 13 and 14 and teach the formation movement at 16 and 17 when the kids understand it and learn it more quickly. Maybe I am completely wrong. I think FSM said that in Europe they stay with small sided practice areas until quite an advanced age, chosing to concentrate on skills and ball movement in tight spaces over formation movement.

Generally I think you are right, but even at the younger ages the compression is almost always too severe and I happen to be one who believes that you can begin to teach game tactics without spoiling individual skill development. I think players are OK when they are with or near the ball, but weak if not poor away from the ball. This translates into poor defensive positioning, fewer pass options and weak overall team shape. From the coaches box it is difficult to really get a good feel for how bad this can be, but from the angle I mention it just jumps out at you. Certainly with almost all U-13 or even U-14 teams this is a relatively small part of the coaching experience but even in a U-12 team showing is usually better than telling and a 1 hour TV session can be valuable.

I agree. My question, or point was, that certain concepts, like spreading the field, do develop naturally at the older ages. Is accelerating that development at 13 and 14 with high angle tapes real important? We can only teach so much. Should time be spent on formation movement or skills and control at 13 and 14? I am not really sure, but lean towards letting the kids learn skills and control at 13 and 14 and teach the formation movement at 16 and 17 when the kids understand it and learn it more quickly. Maybe I am completely wrong. I think FSM said that in Europe they stay with small sided practice areas until quite an advanced age, chosing to concentrate on skills and ball movement in tight spaces over formation movement.

Generally I think you are right, but even at the younger ages the compression is almost always too severe and I happen to be one who believes that you can begin to teach game tactics without spoiling individual skill development. I think players are OK when they are with or near the ball, but weak if not poor away from the ball. This translates into poor defensive positioning, fewer pass options and weak overall team shape. From the coaches box it is difficult to really get a good feel for how bad this can be, but from the angle I mention it just jumps out at you. Certainly with almost all U-13 or even U-14 teams this is a relatively small part of the coaching experience but even in a U-12 team showing is usually better than telling and a 1 hour TV session can be valuable. from Kazimierz

[FSM]

Here's a better summation of what U13/U14s should be doing at this age according to the Best Practices:

JUNIOR LEVEL
As the players graduate to the junior level, they should be comfortable with the ball and have an insight into the game that will allow them to deal with the increasing pace of the game (both in athletic speed and speed of decisions). The goal at this point in a player’s development is to
begin expanding his understanding of the game as much as his technical and game maturity will allow. Again, this is accomplished through the small-sided game model for practice (up through 9 v 9 games) and the full-sided game for matches. The graduation to the full-sided game model
should be a logical and subtle step. The ideas and principles that apply to the smaller game models continue to apply to the bigger game. The outcome of the game is still largely determined by ball skill and game insight.

By the way, I think you will find a similar compression, poor off ball movement and bad positioning in most U16 and up games. Especially for girls. My initial suggestion of videoing games from this vantage - although IMHO valuable at U-13 and U-14 - was more intended for these ages and the discussion about formations - although involving the Stars team as a unique example for their age - is more appropriate for HS age players.

[Fred Marks]

JFF... I am not a fan of running up scores either. I agree that the best way to control it is to play down as many players as it takes to even things out. Our team coaches are aware of this. If at some time I (or we) we have exhibited poor sportsmanship I sincerely apologize.

Fred M.

Seems reasonable. And before someone starts talking about goal differential effects, most tournaments limit the goal differential to something like 4 per game. Sometimes large goal differences are the result of frustration for the team. A parent on the rising U16 stars mentioned that their team went out to 'kick some but&" against Vermont in the Regionals (10 - 0, I think) after losing the first two games. They had no chance in the Regional at that point but it probably made them feel better about themselves and prepared for next year.


Troll alert, Vermont lost the first 2 Regional games 10-0 so why jump on the Stars. Someone is bored


No Troll. Actually trying to make a point that all teams do it. It was agreeing with posters like Cujo who suggested 21-0 is better than left footed play, etc. Is he a Troll too? And you confirmed the point that the WNY team did it as well. Great teams will run up the score and not back down. Thank you for agreeing with me.

Guest writes:

A lot of coaches will take no pity on the Hamlets in similiar situations.

No wonder it is hard to find a good coach.

As in the Shakespeare Hamlets or Fuller?

[JustForFun]

Fred it was you and it was years ago. Apology accepted but there was no need to apologize. It really is not a big deal. Just a point of discussion. I think the Scorps are a great organization and I know you are proud of them as well.

sccrdad awkwardly writes: (click Preview to see your post prior to submitting and you can make changes)

You also miss the point that you are responsible to your team first.

I understand your point - I do not think I missed anything. Some people disagree with you and believe it takes a small village. We are a community, and helping and supporting the community as a whole is important and even vital. I did not miss your point - we have a different perspective. You are looking at the individual player and the individual team first, I am looking at the league and teams as a whole. I think the community is more important and I think it is more important to teach our children about restraint and community responsibilities than a special moment scoring a goal during the humiliation of an opposing team.

[JustForFun]

Kazimierz writes:

By the way, I think you will find a similar compression, poor off ball movement and bad positioning in most U16 and up games. Especially for girls. My initial suggestion of videoing games from this vantage - although IMHO valuable at U-13 and U-14 - was more intended for these ages and the discussion about formations - although involving the Stars team as a unique example for their age - is more appropriate for HS age players.

Agreed 100%. And FSM was fast and on the mark as always. At 13 and 14 it is recommended by licensed coaches to concentrate on small-sided games. The formation movement issues are for older ages, although some will disagree. But it is my experience that the dissenters are usually people that have not seen their kids play up through U18. Watching the play up through the various age groups changes your perspective and understanding, IMHO.

One of the greatest tools available to a coach regarding formation is when you can find a high vantage point behind one's own goal and film the game from that angle. Unfortunately there are few facilities offering this option, but the new field one at Lancaster does!! If you get a chance to watch a game from up there you will find a few nearly universal things. First is that teams rarely spread out across the entire width of the field.

Great post. I saw the Stars-Bolts U14 State Cup game from that Lancaster field, and I thought both teams did a good job of spreading out, albeit the Stars a little better one.

I understand that the Stars team practices formation movement - it is only my understanding becuase I have no first hand knowledge. I think it is pretty unusual to start fromation movement at this young of an age. It is usually referred to as a Situational exercise or practice. In other words they are taught how to change fields and cut and weave. It is fun to watch, but my experience is that at 14 it is not a natural progression to play in this manner. It has been taught and trained with a lot of time and effort. What happens at U16 and U17 when the other girls naturally progress to the stage where they comprehend the formation movement implications? Do the trained teams continue to excel? Or does the situational training simply make a younger team more advanced and successful at a younger age? Personally I would prefer my kids to continue to work on skills and touches at 14, and work on formational movement at U16 or U17 when kids comprehend it more easily.
I'm in the same boat--no firsthand knowledge of the Stars practice methods, but second-hand info. I understand that in practices they do a great deal of repetition of plays, formation movement, etc.

My daughter's team around this level still devotes lots of practice time to skills, touches, etc. (which I think is great). Sometimes, when they play the Stars, it seems like the latter has a well-practiced play at hand for certain situations, while her team seems to be sort of making it up as they go along (but using a well-practiced repertoire of overlaps, touches, etc.).

Not having played soccer myself, I don't know whether my impressions are valid or not. :)

From what I can see the Stars training is technique and funtional based. You can't pull a cart if you haven't got a horse.

Individual technique
Technical functional
Tactical functional
Shadow play
Combination play
Technical Tactical

Isn't this what all the clubs should be doing, the parents all pay the same price, some even more ;)

The Stars practices are almost entirely small sided scrimmage, technique and skills oriented. They do not practice set plays. However, about once every couple of weeks they have an extra session specific to either offensive or defensive players in which they work on tactical skills for those positions. My understanding is that the cutting and weaving is based more on improvising against what a defense presents and not on set calls.

Thanks. I suppose what I see the Stars players do so well is respond decisively to what the defense presents in certain situations. Also, how many times have I seen a Stars outside middie or forward pass the ball ahead to a center middie, who immediately pivots and kicks a through ball to the corner for the first player (who is already sprinting ahead)? Certainly that kind of play must be rehearsed many times, like a Tom Brady sideline pass?

[Cujo]

From what I can see the Stars training is technique and funtional based. You can't pull a cart if you haven't got a horse.

Individual technique
Technical functional
Tactical functional
Shadow play
Combination play
Technical Tactical

Isn't this what all the clubs should be doing, the parents all pay the same price, some even more ;)

Bunching on the ball is not just a product of inexperience. It is a function of the size of the field they are playing on and the ability (or lack there of) of players to hit the ball long distances. This is why small sided play is great. It is meaningless to try and get a 10 year old to "switch fields" on a 125 x 75 pitch. a) because they cannot physically do it, and b) they have not learned to consistently play with their head up to recognize the opportunity, and c) because their teammates have not yet mastered play away from the ball.

Guest writes:

Possibly the poster was being diplomatic, but if so, it's OK, there's no need to be diplomatic--I admit I'm pretty dumb, and I'm just an anonymous guest anyway.

We are all pretty dumb when we have not played the game and learned from experience. That does not make people who have learned from experience smart, but possbily have more understanding. I am guessing you did not play soccer as a kid or in college, so that does not make you dumb, just a novice. Novices are not dumb, they are just novices. We are all novices in various aspects of life because we can not all learn everything - with the singular exception of my partner who knows ...........

As for being an anonymous guest, it would be great if you would register - it is painless, only takes a few minutes and helps in the continuity of the forum and thread.

You're right, I'm a novice, and this has been a great thread so far, thanks to you, Kaz, other guests, et al. As for registering, this forum is already addictive enough. If I ever registered, my life would be over!

But I will consider doing so.... :)

[FSM]

It seems that there might be some confusion here. You shouldn't teach technique unless you also teach how and when to use that technique. The how and the when refers to tactics, but tactics is not just team tactics. It is also individual and small group tactics. When coaching youth soccer there is a certain progression of what to teach and when to teach it, but I don't believe experienced coaches would indicate you completely abandon tactics for technique or technique for tactics. Even the professionals still work on technique.

Here's some additional sources that might be of help understanding the progression.

Coaching Youth Soccer, The Official Coaching book of the Dutch soccer Association

The Dutch break down coaching objectives into 3 categories (TIC) described as follows:

Techniques: This encompasses the basic skills, necessary to play the game. No matter how small children are, or however elementary the standard of play, the players possess a certain degree of technical skill.

Insight: which is necessary in order to understand what actions are appropriate or inappropriate in a given situation. Insight is largely a question of experience and soccer intelligence.

Communication: Communication in this context refers to the interaction between the players and all elements involved in the game. This obviously covers communication with players of the same and the opposing (verbal and non-verbal), but it also covers interaction with the ball (speed, weight, hard or soft, etc.); the field of play (flat, bumpy, wet, dry); the spectators (cheering, jeering); the officials; the coac; etc.

What objectives apply at each age group then looks like this:

5-7 year olds T.i.c.
7-12 year olds T.I.c.
12-16 year olds T.I.C.
16-18 year olds T.I.C.
18 year olds T.I.C.

Mike Singleton's 21st Century Development Manual also address the progression (bear with me as I try to get the chart to line up correctly):



http://www.mayouthsoccer.org/download/1 ... manual.pdf (http://www.mayouthsoccer.org/download/129_21st_century_player_development_manual.pdf) (pages 54 & 55)

TRAINING PRIORITIES
In terms of the sequence of development, players need to learn technique before tactics and then small group tactics before team tactics. The Player Developmental Model shown below illustrates the sequence and the general relationship between technique and tactics.

PLAYER DEVELOPMENT MODEL

U-6____________U-8________ U-10_______ U-12_________ U-14_______ U-16________ U-18
Dribbling ---- → Basic technique -- → ------ Advanced technique --- →------- Advanced technique at speed
----------------------Ind Tactics ----- → ---- Sm grp tactics ------------- → -------Team tactics

The model above is meant to be simple and the terms used are further clarified in the following sentences. Basic technique refers to the ability to dribble, shoot, receive balls from the ground or the air, and pass short and medium range ground passes. Advanced technique refers to the ability to receive and pass long range passes, bend balls with the inside and outside of the foot, chip the ball, volley, and head. Advanced technique at speed simply means the ability to execute all of the above at full game speed. This may mean being able to use one or two touches or may mean using more touches and bursting into spaces when appropriate. Whatever the technique is, it is important that players are able to perform the technique well and efficiently. Individual tactics refers to attacking and defending in one-against-one situations. Small group tactics refers to player decisions in attack and defense, within small groups of up to 4v4, where players learn about wall passes, crossovers, overlaps, support angles, basic depth and width within the triangle and diamond shapes. Players will also learn about timing and overall group movement. Team tactics refers to attack and defense within the 11v11 game, where players learn about team shape, situational (time of game, score, game importance) decisions, and decisions in the thirds of the field.

As mentioned previously in the recreational program section, players cannot perform tactics if they are unable to demonstrate technical proficiency. Players need to develop a full repertoire of technical skills so they are able to perform the tasks required to play successfully. If a player cannot accurately and powerfully shoot, then teaching that player and the team ways to get that player in the position to shoot are not going to be rewarding. If players cannot pass accurately, your team will likely be unable to get anyone into the position to shoot anyway. If your player's first touch is not soft, he will likely lose the ball when trying to set up his shot in a crowded penalty box. As players get older the game becomes much faster and more physical. For players to continue to experience success, they need to perform these skills and make decisions quicker in every year that passes. If they cannot perform the skills or make the decisions quick enough they will likely lose the ball or get hurt. It is true, self-preservation will teach them to release the ball more quickly at times. I would hope this is something us coaches can teach the players before it gets to the point of self-preservation.

[Cujo]

It seems that there might be some confusion here. You shouldn't teach technique unless you also teach how and when to use that technique. The how and the when refers to tactics, but tactics is not just team tactics. It is also individual and small group tactics. When coaching youth soccer there is a certain progression of what to teach and when to teach it, but I don't believe experienced coaches would indicate you completely abandon tactics for technique or technique for tactics. Even the professionals still work on technique.

Here's some additional sources that might be of help understanding the progression.

[quote]Coaching Youth Soccer, The Official Coaching book of the Dutch soccer Association
Depends on age.............. you don't talk about overlapping runs to an 8 year old.
The Dutch break down coaching objectives into 3 categories (TIC) described as follows:

Techniques: This encompasses the basic skills, necessary to play the game. No matter how small children are, or however elementary the standard of play, the players possess a certain degree of technical skill.

Insight: which is necessary in order to understand what actions are appropriate or inappropriate in a given situation. Insight is largely a question of experience and soccer intelligence.

Communication: Communication in this context refers to the interaction between the players and all elements involved in the game. This obviously covers communication with players of the same and the opposing (verbal and non-verbal), but it also covers interaction with the ball (speed, weight, hard or soft, etc.); the field of play (flat, bumpy, wet, dry); the spectators (cheering, jeering); the officials; the coac; etc.

What objectives apply at each age group then looks like this:

5-7 year olds T.i.c.
7-12 year olds T.I.c.
12-16 year olds T.I.C.
16-18 year olds T.I.C.
18 year olds T.I.C.

Mike Singleton's 21st Century Development Manual also address the progression (bear with me as I try to get the chart to line up correctly):



http://www.mayouthsoccer.org/download/1 ... manual.pdf (http://www.mayouthsoccer.org/download/129_21st_century_player_development_manual.pdf) (pages 54 & 55)

TRAINING PRIORITIES
In terms of the sequence of development, players need to learn technique before tactics and then small group tactics before team tactics. The Player Developmental Model shown below illustrates the sequence and the general relationship between technique and tactics.

PLAYER DEVELOPMENT MODEL

U-6____________U-8________ U-10_______ U-12_________ U-14_______ U-16________ U-18
Dribbling ---- → Basic technique -- → ------ Advanced technique --- →------- Advanced technique at speed
----------------------Ind Tactics ----- → ---- Sm grp tactics ------------- → -------Team tactics

The model above is meant to be simple and the terms used are further clarified in the following sentences. Basic technique refers to the ability to dribble, shoot, receive balls from the ground or the air, and pass short and medium range ground passes. Advanced technique refers to the ability to receive and pass long range passes, bend balls with the inside and outside of the foot, chip the ball, volley, and head. Advanced technique at speed simply means the ability to execute all of the above at full game speed. This may mean being able to use one or two touches or may mean using more touches and bursting into spaces when appropriate. Whatever the technique is, it is important that players are able to perform the technique well and efficiently. Individual tactics refers to attacking and defending in one-against-one situations. Small group tactics refers to player decisions in attack and defense, within small groups of up to 4v4, where players learn about wall passes, crossovers, overlaps, support angles, basic depth and width within the triangle and diamond shapes. Players will also learn about timing and overall group movement. Team tactics refers to attack and defense within the 11v11 game, where players learn about team shape, situational (time of game, score, game importance) decisions, and decisions in the thirds of the field.

As mentioned previously in the recreational program section, players cannot perform tactics if they are unable to demonstrate technical proficiency. Players need to develop a full repertoire of technical skills so they are able to perform the tasks required to play successfully. If a player cannot accurately and powerfully shoot, then teaching that player and the team ways to get that player in the position to shoot are not going to be rewarding. If players cannot pass accurately, your team will likely be unable to get anyone into the position to shoot anyway. If your player's first touch is not soft, he will likely lose the ball when trying to set up his shot in a crowded penalty box. As players get older the game becomes much faster and more physical. For players to continue to experience success, they need to perform these skills and make decisions quicker in every year that passes. If they cannot perform the skills or make the decisions quick enough they will likely lose the ball or get hurt. It is true, self-preservation will teach them to release the ball more quickly at times. I would hope this is something us coaches can teach the players before it gets to the point of self-preservation.[/quote:2qu3x718]

Depends on age.............. you don't want to spend too much time talking about overlapping runs to an 8 year old.

I question the value of discussing insight with a 5 year old. The i should be really really tiny.

They need to play lots of small sided stuff. They are learning fundamental tactical stuff without even knowing that they are doing it as long as they are managed properly.

[Fred Marks]

"They need to play lots of small sided stuff. They are learning fundamental tactical stuff without even knowing that they are doing it as long as they are managed properly."

Right, that is the small 'i' part of the equation.

[FSM]

I question the value of discussing insight with a 5 year old. The i should be really really tiny.

I see an awful lot of value at this age, but it comes in the form of, "No Johnny! The other way! The other way!!!" :P

right...you have to start somewhere... whatever is age appropriate.

[Fred Marks]

Fred M. ^^ as usual the website signed me out as the post went up..

The type of players that one team has determines the formation that a coach must use. Amazing and unbelievable how clubs are dictating what formation that a coach must use. Only in this country! Just me 2 cents.

[Fred Marks]

That would be my two cents in this country sir!

That would be my two cents in this country sir!
The rest is correct... or do you demand your coaches to use a certain formation no matter what?

[Fred Marks]

Scorpions teams play a 4-3-3. Coaches are free to adjust if neccesary.

You got a problem with that?

[Fred Marks]

Kidding

Scorpions teams play a 4-3-3. Coaches are free to adjust if neccesary.

You got a problem with that?
Not at all. I respect that and "coaches are free to adjust if necessary" agrees with I just said. That's how it should be.

[keeper]

Just me 2 cents.

Would that be "Just me 2 pence" or "Just me tuppence worth".

Which brings up an old question; why do people provide 2 cents worth of opinions when only offered a penny for their thoughts.

And also suggests some great screen names for any of the guests to use:

twopenny halfpenny
halfpenny-twopenny (for you STYX fans)
The Grand Duke of Pfennig-Halbpfennig





.

[Cujo]

Just me 2 cents.

Would that be "Just me 2 pence" or "Just me tuppence worth".

Which brings up an old question; why do people provide 2 cents worth of opinions when only offered a penny for their thoughts.

And also suggests some great screen names for any of the guests to use:

twopenny halfpenny
halfpenny-twopenny (for you STYX fans)
The Grand Duke of Pfennig-Halbpfennig





.

Thats how therapists make their profit....

[FSM]

Just me 2 cents.

Would that be "Just me 2 pence" or "Just me tuppence worth".

Which brings up an old question; why do people provide 2 cents worth of opinions when only offered a penny for their thoughts.

And also suggests some great screen names for any of the guests to use:

twopenny halfpenny
halfpenny-twopenny (for you STYX fans)
The Grand Duke of Pfennig-Halbpfennig





.

Keeper, you're starting to sound like Mr. Stats. ;) :D