i will always remember walcott playing against mk dons for us in a game that finished 2-2 and one of the best moments of that match was when he came inside the middle of the park and ran past 3 players - AOC did this against blackpool and utd last season and it shows that the middle of the park is a great place to do this as they dont expect this fast play, what this then does is draw at least one defender to you - freeing up another attacker to make a run, full backs may not get involved as they will cover the wing and the results can be devastating. walcott was never used properly and AOC could be really effective in the middle of the park this way, thats why i really agree with this statement. the messi example is the best, alot of his impact isnt just because of hi skill but his audacity to run at players through the middle which draws others out and creates space - people just arent used to it because on the wing you can force them down one side whereas in the middle messi/AOC have the speed and skill to go either way and open up many options. i really want to see more of this tried this year as i really think it was devastating the few times i did see it.
Exactly, exactly, exactly! I coach an under 10 team and for two years parents have been asking me when players will have a set position ( I rotate positions in each half of a match, every week without fail). Parents, and therefore their boys, don't see that there is a need to give the players development and flexibility to play in all positions. This helps the boys develop all skills and techniques. English football Stereotypes players and pigeon holed them too rigidly. Our game is not as flexible as say in holland, Germany or Spain.
I also need to add that this is also brought about by the English disease of insisting that young boys teams have a win at all costs attitude to their games. Thus, players get played in their "best" position, before anyone knows if that really is their best position. "johnny is big and can kick it s long way, so he's CB" is what happens.
I too used to coach children starting at under 9. I have to say we used to have mid week training and that is when we would play them out of position, to see how they would/could cope. Most seemed to want to be a striker or goalkeeper!! The first year was hopeless, the second they came second in their respective league but won the cup. By the third year most could play at more than one position. About 60% became two footed two were particularly lethal with either feet! None went on to play full time professional football. Although 5 went on to play conference football. (two for Salisbury) We had a lot of opposition from Family's sometimes as to why we were not playing their son in his preferred position. You dare not tell them that their son and heir was useless at being a striker as he couldn't run for a toffee, but no one could touch him at centre back!! After the second year together they began to see we were not duffers and we did know just a little about football, although you always had those that could do things better!!!!!
Under Adkins, we don't have any out and out wingers - both Lallana and Chamberlain cut in from the flanks on a regular basis. Guly and Forte are more central/forward attackers and Dickson is really a left back. The only winger is really Holmes and he has hardly played in the last few years.
Pace is pace. It's useful to have, but like most physica attributes, it isn't the pre-requiste of a modern day player. Most coaches are well aware that technique trumps physcality, but can only work with the players put infront of them.
Great stuff that Beddytare. Enjoyed reading that and can relate to parents bit. Interesting you mentioned the league and cup wins first .... I was impressed by the player development bit more, however mist people only are interested in their johnny winning the cup at those younger ages.
Hi, thanks for the comments fatletiss, Beddytare etc. I have always wanted to do some coaching; what qualifications do you need?
The old way was FA level 1, then through to level 3, but now they promote the FA Youth Award which is a much better way of coaching and developing kids. You may "have" to do level one FA coaching badge (simple) but I'd say go for Youth Award Induction followed by Youth Award levels 1 to 3
At that level You would not necessary have to have qualifications in coaching. Although I did get some qualifications while in the forces. Not sure that they are/would have been any good in civvy street. In my opinion all you need is to have a good level of football under your belt. I must admit I had this thing that if you were going to be any good at the game you would need to be two footed. Hence I set up a programme of training with the use of both feet. Some could already kick with both most could not. Better than half were useful if not proficient by the second year. For coaching youngsters Oddriveroakwizards........you would need to be well known by the families whose children you were coaching for obvious reasons and preferably with a child of your own. In my case I was dragged into it by an ex colleague and friend who knew my football background and history. My own son at this time was too young, I only said I would help for a year but stayed 7!! I really enjoyed it.
That is true fatletiss........but you would have to be affiliated to a team first before you could put in for any level of a coaching certificates (or at least you used to)
