| A Time for Reflection (January 2008) |
The start of a new year gives us pause to evaluate our direction
By Jay Martin
Happy New Year! We like the new year. It gives us time to start over, to reflect on the year just completed, to set goals and resolutions for the new year and to revitalize ourselves as we move forward.
The new year in soccer looks pretty good. There were great strides made in U.S. soccer in 2007. MLS had its best average attendance ever; more children are playing soccer today than 12 months ago; soccer has made inroads in the mainstream American sports pages; David Beckham is in the house and both the men’s and women’s national teams continue to play better soccer and earn respect internationally. What could be better?
But as coaches it is important to know where soccer is going and how these trends will influence what we do on the field. It is time for us to have a look at the recent soccer past, see what is happening and set goals and resolutions based on these trends for 2008. Historically soccer played at the highest level has influenced how people all over the world play the game. The history of the World Cup is the history of the evolution of soccer. In 1958 Brazil played a 4-2-4. In 1959 every coach all over the world tried it! In 1974 the Dutch played “total football.” In 1975 everyone tried it. And so it goes.
What is happening in international soccer at the highest level? How will it affect coaching in this country? Can we make “resolutions” for our teams based on these changes?
In the summer of 2007 there were some significant tournaments played in Europe. The trends in these tournaments may impact how soccer is played around the world and will impact the coaching in this country. UEFA has a technical committee chaired by long time NSCAA friend Andy Roxburgh. This committee analyzes every UEFA competition and reports the results to the membership. Here is a summary of the UEFA “talking points” for each competition. All of these technical reports can be found online at www.uefa.com... Search; Technical Reports.
The UEFA U-17 Men’s Championship was held in Belgium. The technical committee cited the following trends:
• Acting or reacting? The report suggested that many teams played to their potential only when they were chasing the game and needed a result. When teams fell behind or were tied, the pace of the game increased; passing tempo increased; wide midfielders pushed forward to press opponents higher up the field; and defensive midfielders became very adventurous. Does this mean that the initial approach or game plan was too cautious? Is a “minimal risk” philosophy filtering down to the U-17 level? Are teams too focused on results?
• Are wings being clipped? This tournament reasserted the importance of exploiting wide spaces. Yet very few players were able to get to the bye line and have the time and space to deliver a killing pass. The wide players frequently started the game in a deep-lying defensive position. Having a wide teammate seemed to deter the backs from going forward and getting into the attack. Is the shortage of overlapping runs by fullbacks related to the emphasis on defending or to the lack of ability? Is it tactics or technique?
• Are these tournaments harvesting “peas in a pod”? All eight teams played the same system. It is hard to believe that all countries in the tournament play the same or they are all culturally the same. Are we running the risk of producing predictable, standardized soccer?
• Injury time. As in 2006, 92 percent of injuries occurred when there was contact between two players and 80 percent of injuries came in the second half. The doctors claimed fatigue. But, it is legitimate to ask whether positional predictability within identical formations and/or the high number of players concentrated in deep-lying defensive blocks are promoting a more physical game and causing injuries?
The UEFA Men’s U-19 tournament was held in Austria. The technical committee offers the following insight.
• Where are the playmakers? The number 10 has always been magical for soccer teams. No. 10 was known as the playmaker and everything for his/her team went through him/her. In Austria, only one No. 10 (Anis Ben-Hatira of Germany) played as a true playmaker. Attacking strategies seemed to favor the wings and not playing through the middle of the field. Are the players who are true playmakers being assigned other duties? Is the holding midfielder becoming the playmaker? Are we making the most of our young talent?
• Athletes or artists? The “team of the tournament” could have been filled with tall, athletic, powerful defenders. Some observers suggested that the teams did not come with a defending mentality, but defensive qualities were the strengths of many players. Greek coach Nikolaos Nioplias said “…players with vision are becoming a rare species.” Some critics of MLS and Division I college soccer say the same thing is happening in this country. Winning is so important that teams choose athletes first and soccer players next. Is that the message for our young players? Are we developing athletes at the expense of nurturing creativity? Are the players “using” their athletic ability or “relying” on their athletic ability? There is a huge difference!
The finished report of the UEFA U-19 Women’s Tournament in Iceland reports the following concerns:
• Which way to the goal? There were no prolific goal scorers. Of the 45 goals scored, only nine were scored by strikers. In fact, most teams played with only one striker. Is it negative soccer to play with one striker? How can adequate support be offered from the midfielders?
• Are we fit enough to press? “Physically this competition has become more demanding,” commented Danish coach Henrik Lehm. Fitness levels have risen, warm-ups are more choreographed and playing styles have evolved with the level of player’s fitness. Most teams were athletic enough to exert strong pressure on opponents when they possess. This does have effect on the game. In many cases (like the men’s game) the pace of the game and the physical nature of the game outstripped technique.But seen from the opposite side, what must be done to ensure players have enough technical skills to cope with high tempo power soccer?
And finally, the U-21 Tournament in Holland offered the following concerns:
• Sign of the times? The game is 90 minutes long, but the actual playing time is between 50 and 60 minutes. There was only one match that reached the level of 60 actual minutes of playing time. Six matches had real playing time of less than 50 minutes. In fact the Czech Republic v. England game had only 41 minutes of actual playing time. Is it time to re-think what we are doing? Isplaying? Are tactics becoming more important than allowing players to play the game?
• The card game? There was an average of 5.38 yellow cards each game in this competition. Yellow cards lead to conservative (even negative) play, defensive play and a change in tactics that is not appealing for the fans. Is it a fitting punishment for players, teams and fans if a star player is eliminated due to yellow card infractions? What can be done to reduce the high number of yellow cards at the highest level?
• Athletes v. artists? This has been discussed earlier. The playmaker was absent in this tournament. Tough, strong, physical athletes were chosen instead of “soccer players.” The midfield has become a “battlefield” in terms of physical contact and lack of space. Are the high numbers of fouls and cautions related to the athlete v. artist question?
• The lone ranger? Very few teams used more than one striker. This causes concern on a number of fronts:
◊ The solitary figure. Often one striker was left fighting for the ball with at least two defenders. The lone striker needs physical strength, competitive attitude, willingness to run tirelessly and an ability to “hold” the ball for teammates. Is this asking too much of a single player?
◊ The invisible man. The task of the single striker is made more difficult when teams continue to operate as if they were playing with two strikers. Often the keeper or backs resorted to the long ball with the single striker. Without another striker to combine with, the long ball was simply a turnover. Under these circumstances, does the long ball have a place in today’s soccer, or is it being used simply to get the ball out of the defensive third?
◊ Cross purposes. Historically, moves culminating in crosses from the flanks have offered many significant scoring chances. In the past there have been two strikers and at least one midfielder fighting for positions in front of the goal looking to score. This did not happen often in Holland. While there were some great goals scored from crosses, statistically the number of goal attempts was proportionate to the number of crosses. There may be multiple reasons for this (poor crosses for example), but it was clear that the single biggest factor was the single striker. Rarely did the opposite winger or an attacking midfielder fly into the box to get on the end of a cross. Who should be sent into the box? Are we too concerned with giving the opposition a chance for the counterattack when we throw numbers forward? When and where (on the field) do we take risks to score? Is this the right approach?
• The lone ranger and the long ranger. There were only 34 goals from 451 attempts during this tournament. That translates to a 1:13 ratio. Many of the attempts came from distance and these were wide, high or easily saved. Because of the single striker and the low numbers of players in the box, the player in possession of the ball often had no passing options. This often led to a long shot as the only option. Is this the type of attacking coaches at the international level want? Does defending and preventing the counterattack take precedent over true multi-option attacking? Have coaches resigned themselves to searching for the 1-0 victory through a counterattack or set piece and moving on in the tournament?
It is pretty clear from the UEFA analysis of these tournaments that the win-at-all-costs mentality is seeping down from the senior national teams in international competitions to the younger teams. The teams below the senior level always have valued player development. For years the Dutch and German U-17s and 19s did not care about results. Those days appear gone. Former Scotland and German National Team coach Berti Vogts coached the German U-20s for 18 years without fear of losing his job based on results. That, too, has changed.
The type of play described above by the UEFA Technical Committee is finding its way into men’s college soccer and MLS in this country. Maybe results are important at that level for the coach to retain the job. But results are not important at any level below college and/or MLS. Coaches in the United States should not worry about results. The emphasis clearly should be on player development. All coaches should make a New Year’s resolution to develop the player. If we don’t do that, the Beautiful Game will lose its beauty.
|
|
| The Technical Area, NSCAA eNewsletter |
 |
|
|
 |
| Soccer Journal - Published seven times a year in print and once annually online, Soccer Journal is the Official Publication of NSCAA and is one of the few publications in the world produced exclusively for soccer coaches. learn more |
| Insurance - Members in the United States automatically receive $1 million in professional liability insurance, providing coverage for most soccer-related activities. learn more |
| Academy Programs - The benchmark of soccer coaching education is the NSCAA Coaching Academy program. learn more |
| Convention - The NSCAA Convention is "The World's Largest Annual Gathering of Soccer Coaches." Held each January learn more |
| Awards and Recognition - The NSCAA administers an outstanding awards and recognition program which includes Coach of the Year, All-America, long-term service and special recognition awards, designed to recognize excellence in soccer, academics and service to the game. learn more |
| Licensed Apparel - A full line of distinctive coaching gear sets you apart as a member of the NSCAA through our licensed apparel program with adidas. learn more |
| For more details, please proceed to the Benefits of NSCAA Membership Page |
|
|
