Coaching remains a massive issue, but in my experience so do parents who sometimes have a greater desire to see their children win than the children themselves. I have 2 boys who play aged 11 & 14, they both play for a village side who are FA accredited and have a minimum of 2 qualified coaches per team and I have nothing but praise for the coaches in both of their teams. My youngest also plays for Ashford on a Sunday in a higher league but the coaching is less intense as he plays in goal on Sunday and they don't have a specialist goalkeeping coach (the village side does). Last season the under 11s won every match they played and the coach often moved the players around and encouraged them to retain possession and even at times reduced our numbers of the pitch in order to keep the boys and the matches interesting, and as such my son has at some point in the season played in every position but some of the parents would get annoyed that we did not just keep playing in our best positions and formation and scoring as many goals as possible (not withstanding that in an 18 match season we had a goal difference of +150). On the other side my eldest boys side won just once and lost many games by the odd goal, often dominating possession and playing 'nicer' football and being out muscled by bigger quicker boys hitting the ball over the top and running through (damn that high line!) but again the parents on the side lines moan why don't we hit it long, or we need some bigger boys or worse still they leave saying that they want to see their son win some matches! Well I have supported our coaches on both points, my boys are both better players now than they were, the older one is small and confident and plays in the hole (VDV is his hero) and has been encouraged to play to feet and his movement, awareness and his first touch are now so much better than we joined 2 seasons ago. Don't get me wrong you wont be seeing him at the lane anytime soon (except in the stands) but we need parents to support coaches and realise that winning is not everything.
So, what everyone appears to be saying, is that they'd rather our kids be taught how to play nice tikka takka football, rather than learn to win anything? Hm. Seems to me that Arsenal FC has already invented that model.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yawn. Sounds like someone has missed the point of the previous comment. There is still an opinion in this country shared by many that schools don't engage in competitive sports for some vague PC reason of not wanting to have people learn to lose. In other words that there is not enough competition ending with a win/lose result. My own experience (and of many) is that we often employ win/loose too much and too early. And I don't say that for any wishy washy let's not hurt their feelings reason, but because there needs to be much more variety and much more of a long term plan than the result of any one match. But I guess that doesn't fit in with modern ultra short term thinking which infects just about every aspect of modern society.
If the only point of playing a game is to WIN then most are wasting their time. This is the American concept that has invaded the world. The British concept that it has replaced is that taking part is more important. Of course you try to win a game that is the point but you also try to play in the right way and improve your personal skills. Holding by the WIN and second is nowhere idea is IMO a waste of time and if you do support that idea why would you support Spurs? On this basis only the very top teams deserve support....................silly idea.
Totally agree. Long-term improvement almost always necessitates short-term pain But I also agree with Spurf: Nothing in life is so important that you should want to win it at all costs. Winning at sport by cheating is worse than not taking part. The rules of Curling have it right: Curling is a game of skill and of tradition. A shot well executed is a delight to see and it is also a fine thing to observe the time-honoured traditions of curling being applied in the true spirit of the game. Curlers play to win, but never to humble their opponents. A true curler never attempts to distract opponents, nor to prevent them from playing their best, and would prefer to lose rather than to win unfairly. Curlers never knowingly break a rule of the game, nor disrespect any of its traditions. Should they become aware that this has been done inadvertently, they will be the first to divulge the breach. While the main object of the game of curling is to determine the relative skill of the players, the spirit of curling demands good sportsmanship, kindly feeling and honourable conduct. This spirit should influence both the interpretation and the application of the rules of the game and also the conduct of all participants on and off the ice.
See, I don't see any point in playing a competitive game unless it is to win. Yes, I do understand the point that learning to play the game is an important first step, and I follow the argument that, if we let our kids, first, learn to enjoy the game without the pressure of having to win, that might encourage those kids to pick up skills that they might not have learned whilst being fully engaged in trying to win. I see all of that. My point is, that I think it's bollocks. We should be teaching our kids, right from the very start, that winning is all that matters. Teach the kids that winning isn't important, and that is something that they will carry through life. Put your opponent to the sword as quick as you can, and when they are down, keep them down. That should be the philosophy. Sod it! that should be translated into Latin and learn rote by every kid coming into the game. Do you think that Blanchflower or MacKay, or even Perryman were taught that winning isn't important? "Don't go in too hard on the little fellow, lads; we're trying to turn him into a midfield wizard." MacKay would have laughed at that, and then knutted you and the pansy whizz kid. And quite rightly, too, in my view. Ours is not to reason why, ours is but to do and die. An eye for eye, a tooth for a tooth. Once more into the breach, dear friends, once more. Or close up the walls with our English dead. If that's too harsh for some of you to hear, go hug a tree. Just keep it out of English football.
I think that you are missing the point, with regards to England the big problem is our technique, our players are not as good with the ball as other nations which is also a contributory factor with why we import so many players to our top leagues. We need coaches to coach young players to love the ball, I want my children to win matches but I also want them to learn to play the beautiful game too many people both coaches and parents want to win at all costs. Too many teams putting an emphasis on size and power, kick it hard and chase it down can be very effective and it wins matches, and if that's all that matters then fine, but I would rather see my boys coached to play.
I hope you are not suggesting that the likes of Blanchflower, Mackay and Perryman, couldn't play! My son is small and he gets kicked up in the air regularly, but he gets up and gets on with it, I don't have a problem with that, skillful and technically gifted doesn't mean soft.
As AshfordGill is pointing out, and it shouldn't be that difficult to understand, when learning the game the result is not important. You should always play to win otherwise you are almost in effect breaking the rules and certainly the spirit of the game but NOT when trying to learn the game and develop skills. It appears that we are still picking brute force and ignorance over skills as once again Britain falls behind the times and misses the point.
My point is that the people coaching English kids are as a group, well, loser is such a strong word...let's say competitively disadvantaged. Someone saw Iniesta and thought, there's a kid with a brain for football. Look past his small build and you can see a champion. Someone looked at Bale and said, there's a big, fast kid who can kick the ball a long way. You're going to have more winners in the long run if you have more youth coaches who can spot the Iniestas, and not just the Bales. Though I must say, insofar as I've responded to HIAG, I do feel rather piscine.
I was thinking more along the lines of swimming forward on instinct and yet finding myself surrounded by a net... but, yeah, maybe it is more that pre-bellyflop-at-the-barbecue kind of deal.
I find that I catch all kinds in my nets. Be assured, though, that I always throw any stray Spurs-fish back into the river. I'm after juicier fare. Nice, fat Gooner-fish are my favourite catch.
Should HIAG have sanctions on the number and size of nets he can using in a "fishing season" ?? Those Piskie fishies are not in inexhaustible supply.
