Hi guys, Justed wanted to pose an interesting question to you regarding your footballing philosophy. Hypothetically speaking; you have just been appointed director of a football academy ranging from u7s to u21s. What approach would you take and what would be your footballing basics and values you would try to impose on the teams? Withou taking into account the physical conditions on the players how would you like your teams to play? Would you impose a win at all costs type of mentality or on the flip side would it be about technique and development? I look forward to eharing a sensible debate.
think of the ball as a alien, the goal net as its home. put him in the net, Send him home, he misses his home, please send him home.
If you don't score i'll kill your family. for the younger ones i'll focus on technique development etc up until 19 20 odd then focus on winning etc
Like Mr Wright says - solid technical base up till the age of 15/16, then focus on vision, anticipation and reading the game when they're 17/18 and lastly instill a winning mentality for the last few years. The problem with football coaching in the UK is that it has focused on winning for too long - youth set ups used to be all about what you can win rather than developing skills. So players missed out on essential skills cos they were just focusing on winning games in the short term. In the last 20 years Scholes is the only player to come through an English academy with technique that's on a par with the top continental players like Zidane, Xavi and Iniesta. It's one of the reasons we've been so **** in comparison to Spain, France and Italy.
Watched kids in Barcelona Youth Club last year, eight nine years of age it was pass, pass pass. Playing in tight triangles with no sign of a match being played during any of the nights I was watching. It seems to be working for them. I think we English are slow learners because I can remember an outcry about our lack of tecnique compared to the Hungarian side who had just walloped us 6-3 at Wembley. And that was 1953!
Having being involved with football training of kids from 12-17 for 20 years afer I stopped playing I safely say that any or all natural talent is coached out of them as they are predomitabley coached to win which is why the Latins have better control and ball skills. Which is why I jacked it in and run a local team in the Zameretto
it's all about getting the big/fast/strong players up front then just bootin the ball to them, i was watching a youth game not long ago and that's all the manager kept shouting even at 2-0 up, just "OVER THE TOP OVER THE TOP" so all them kids are gonna learn is to hook the ball, leg it after it, hoof it, leg it after it.
Your right about the youth development winning is everything and technique is sometimes ignored. Kids are just expected to know how to shoot, pass and control the ball correctly and many of them don't have a clue. England have developed players to stand alongside the ones you mentioned on a technical basis I think it's the tactics that are so often wrong in English football not really the skill and technique.
I manage my nephew's team, under 13s at the mo, and I get 'em to play very technical footy. I won the league three years running and we're second this year, two points behind top but with a game in hand and still have to play them at home. In training, I get them to play 3 touch, pass-and-move, and work a lot on fitness, and then on technical skills. My typical session looks like this: Warm-up/stretches 10 mins Fitness 15 mins Ball skills 25 mins Limited (i.e. 3 touch, keep the ball on the deck) game 20 mins Unlimited game (no restrictions) 10 mins Warm-down/talk about upcoming games 10 mins
Really? Shame no one told Zidane that... http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/new...gest-regrets-of-his-career-article560373.html
If by 'toughest' player, he played against, he means diving in two footed, then yes, he's got it about right
I'm sure that's exactly what he meant Alternatively he could have meant that Scholes was "almost untouchable in what he does. I never tire of watching him play. You rarely come across the complete footballer, but Scholes is as close to it as you can get." Or maybe he meant "He is very gifted. He makes the game look easy because he’s so much natural *ability." I guess we'll never know...
I keep seeing people making out that Scholes is some kind of hatchet man. But surely if that was the case, there would be at least one player in the last 17 years that Scholes has injured. Care to name one?
Scholes is class, watched him against L'Arse on Saturday, and he still has wonderful skill...apart from his inane inability to tackle Zidane, like any person of modesty, is not comparing Paul Scholes to himself in the same way that we would as fans of Football. Scholes is arguably the best midfielder to come out of English football in the modern era, but Zidane is the best footballer in my lifetime
100% agree. Zidane has the technique of Scholes or Xavi, allied to the physical game of Vieira or Keane, the dynamicism of Gerrard at his peak, and could dribble almost as well as Messi. Best and most complete footballer. Others may compare to him on specific aspects, but he had the lot.
