Love in with "Possession" and "Passing Football"

[pentlando]

This for me was one of the main issues that arose from the debate last night. Steven Pressley and Craig Levein disagreed on the way youngsters should be coached in Scotland. Basically Pressley wanted them to be developed on technique and playing passing and possession football. Levein wanted them developed in a way that would allow them to adapt to different styles of football.

From responses on here it seems most are in favour of Pressley's theory, and I feel other styles of play are being disregarded.

Many people think the alternative to passing football is 'hoofball'. It's not. There are many styles a manager can use to get a win and they all involve a degree of difficulty and can be admired in different ways.

Under Tony Mowbray Hibs didn't really play anything like the Barcelona style, the passing was quick and direct looking to get from back to front as quickly as possible but using the midfield.

When Rangers reached the Uefa Cup Final recently they used an extensive defensive approach (also used by Mourinho when Inter Milan lost a player away to Barcelona) which basically induced mistakes from teams better than them partly due to the frustration in not being able to break Rangers down.

There should definitely be more of a focus on technique and passing football at younger levels than there is at the moment, but IMO players still need to be taught the skills needed to play in different styles if a manager sees fit.

[erskine-hibby]

This for me was one of the main issues that arose from the debate last night. Steven Pressley and Craig Levein disagreed on the way youngsters should be coached in Scotland. Basically Pressley wanted them to be developed on technique and playing passing and possession football. Levein wanted them developed in a way that would allow them to adapt to different styles of football.

From responses on here it seems most are in favour of Pressley's theory, and I feel other styles of play are being disregarded.

Many people think the alternative to passing football is 'hoofball'. It's not. There are many styles a manager can use to get a win and they all involve a degree of difficulty and can be admired in different ways.

Under Tony Mowbray Hibs didn't really play anything like the Barcelona style, the passing was quick and direct looking to get from back to front as quickly as possible but using the midfield.

When Rangers reached the Uefa Cup Final recently they used an extensive defensive approach (also used by Mourinho when Inter Milan lost a player away to Barcelona) which basically induced mistakes from teams better than them partly due to the frustration in not being able to break Rangers down.

There should definitely be more of a focus on technique and passing football at younger levels than there is at the moment, but IMO players still need to be taught the skills needed to play in different styles if a manager sees fit.


I agree with Pressley.
The problems really are that we have lost technical ability over the years for the "win at all cost" approach. Most teams can hardly string 2 passes together and most top team players have the first touch of an elephant.
If the basics are ingrained into players like passing, touch and close control, then it doesn't matter what style the manager want's them to play, they will have the skills to adapt.

[IWasThere2016]

I agree with Pressley. We have to develop control of, and composure on the ball as the fundamental basics of the game IMHO. Other skills should be then supplemented and compliment these basics.

[Daz1875]

See these debates are so annoying and they always come back to the same issues that KIDS are not being coached correctly, this is where i disagree, i have been involved in coaching kids football teams for 10 years my current team i have had for 3 years and are now at under 16's all i ever do is work on passing and moving then on a sunday we come up against teams that play hoofball and end up losing if all teams played the same way we would be the debating about the technique, you have to have the two types look back the years when Wimbledon beat Liverpool in the FA Cup Final and that was Hoofball.

There are some talented kids out there but the problem is there is not enough talented coaches about, most coaches are parents of their own sons who claim they only have the TEAM's interest in their mind i am sorry that is not true, i dont have kids i do it for the good of the game and i cant wait to go back to the beginning again with the younger ones and teach them how to play the Barca way now that is football !!!

Fair play to grease monkey Pressley and look at how his Falkirk team play with the ball at the deck it is great to watch and with kids, i am not shocked that Harry Potter has said this also as his DUFC team were the king of hoofball he is slowly changing his ways with the national team and tries to get the ball down.

:pfgwa



This for me was one of the main issues that arose from the debate last night. Steven Pressley and Craig Levein disagreed on the way youngsters should be coached in Scotland. Basically Pressley wanted them to be developed on technique and playing passing and possession football. Levein wanted them developed in a way that would allow them to adapt to different styles of football.

From responses on here it seems most are in favour of Pressley's theory, and I feel other styles of play are being disregarded.

Many people think the alternative to passing football is 'hoofball'. It's not. There are many styles a manager can use to get a win and they all involve a degree of difficulty and can be admired in different ways.

Under Tony Mowbray Hibs didn't really play anything like the Barcelona style, the passing was quick and direct looking to get from back to front as quickly as possible but using the midfield.

When Rangers reached the Uefa Cup Final recently they used an extensive defensive approach (also used by Mourinho when Inter Milan lost a player away to Barcelona) which basically induced mistakes from teams better than them partly due to the frustration in not being able to break Rangers down.

There should definitely be more of a focus on technique and passing football at younger levels than there is at the moment, but IMO players still need to be taught the skills needed to play in different styles if a manager sees fit.

[blackpoolhibs]

Its apparent to me that if you lack the basic ability to control a ball, then hoofball will be your biggest asset.

Have the kids working on technique from the minute they start kicking a ball, and supplement it later with the rest.

The Dutch guy who's working at the SFA said this, as did De Boer, this is from poeple who come from a country of 15 million, that regularly punch way above their size.

[Hibby Bairn]

I agree with Daz here and the dutch guy on the programme alluded to this also.

I watch kids football every week at U10 and U11 and the quality and style of football and 'technique' is very good for kids of that age. But what I do see and hear is the coaches "instructing" the kids through EVERY move and minute of the games. The kids don't need to think, problem solve and decide on a lot of what they do next.

The other thing is that the freedom to TRY things is removed in many cases due to too much structured coaching and instruction. That is why we hardly ever see any child at U10 or U11 trying a step over, overhead kick etc. in the way that they undoubtedly would if Mr Adult Coach wasn't around.

Most of what we do is good. It just needs finessed at the edges to make it even better.

[Septimus]

Many of the truly great Scottish players learned their trade with a tennis ball and a pair of plimsolls. How many players now have a dependable first touch? Ball control is required whether the ball is coming at you from fifty feet with snow on it or not. Hoofball/football. Its the ball in the back of the net that does it for me and the modern laboured interchanges of passing between centre halves leaves me cold.

[sauzee6_2]

See these debates are so annoying and they always come back to the same issues that KIDS are not being coached correctly, this is where i disagree, i have been involved in coaching kids football teams for 10 years my current team i have had for 3 years and are now at under 16's all i ever do is work on passing and moving then on a sunday we come up against teams that play hoofball and end up losing if all teams played the same way we would be the debating about the technique, you have to have the two types look back the years when Wimbledon beat Liverpool in the FA Cup Final and that was Hoofball.

There are some talented kids out there but the problem is there is not enough talented coaches about, most coaches are parents of their own sons who claim they only have the TEAM's interest in their mind i am sorry that is not true, i dont have kids i do it for the good of the game and i cant wait to go back to the beginning again with the younger ones and teach them how to play the Barca way now that is football !!!

Fair play to grease monkey Pressley and look at how his Falkirk team play with the ball at the deck it is great to watch and with kids, i am not shocked that Harry Potter has said this also as his DUFC team were the king of hoofball he is slowly changing his ways with the national team and tries to get the ball down.

:pfgwa

So why do you play to the other team? Sure, winning is important, but by playing to the other teams tactics you are being dragged down by the score! Who cares about the score when kids are learning??? PF needs to win or he gets sacked - youth managers need to develop players. If you worry about winning surely this can be detrimental to development??? Can they not lose and still learn??

[snooky]

I agree with Harry Potter.
Who needs forwards, FFS?

[Hibernia Na Eir]

potter, the new bearded twat of the nation!

[Viva_Palmeiras]

Hows the philosophy working at Livi?

[S.sct]

Hate to back Potter but he didn't stricktly advocate hoofball. Elvis made the point that kids should be coached in a certain way and maintain this style (passing) through into the first team. Potter basically agreed in the method of coaching but made the point that they may have to adapt to any method (including the long ball game) in order to win a game. Potter also said that the technique and skills would and could be used in any style of play. His point was when you move up to the first team it's all about winning, is he wrong?

I did like Pressley's comments on the whole, very refreshing and basically mirroring punters views. I would however like to hear his views again if he was managing at a higher level.

[Mickey Edwards]

I guess the main point in these debates is that being good at Scottish football and winning games in this country is not the same as being good at football per se compared with the rest of Planet Earth. Unfortunately we are good at the Scottish game but not at the game as it is played in the better footballing nations at international level. Teams being unsuccessful in Scotland does not necessarily mean that their managers are wrong if the plan is to make their players better rather than making a winning team within a very peculiar footballing culture.

Advocating anything other than the passing technical game at youth level is far too risky and there should be no amibiguity from the national coach if he wants to choose from a large pool of able players.

Players can easily develop the aggressive physical side of their game when they are fully grown but the technical side cannot be picked up later on.

Sorry for stating the obvious but it does need trotted out each time "The Great Debate" is happening.

[Thecat23]

Ball is round, surface is flat, fit players should find space, pass to player in space, keep ball moving, shoot score... Simples. :cb

[Twa Cairpets]

I agree with Daz here and the dutch guy on the programme alluded to this also.

I watch kids football every week at U10 and U11 and the quality and style of football and 'technique' is very good for kids of that age. But what I do see and hear is the coaches "instructing" the kids through EVERY move and minute of the games. The kids don't need to think, problem solve and decide on a lot of what they do next.

The other thing is that the freedom to TRY things is removed in many cases due to too much structured coaching and instruction. That is why we hardly ever see any child at U10 or U11 trying a step over, overhead kick etc. in the way that they undoubtedly would if Mr Adult Coach wasn't around.
Most of what we do is good. It just needs finessed at the edges to make it even better.

Spot on.

I now try to minimise my match-day coaching other than good feedback and some very general stuff. I'd much prefer a player to make a mistake and then learn from it than not try something in the first place. I had an interesting chat with a Dad who in the early days told his kid "if in doubt kick it out". I went over the fact that I'd prefer them to work out when that is the right thing to do - I'd prefer them while theyre learning the game to try something, fail, even if it loses a goal so they can work out whats a good plan of action and whats not. Last thign I tell my players every week is try stuff and enjoy it.

Micro managing just makes players devolve responsibility. Teams where a great hoof is applauded loudly and a neat turn is met with "less of the fancy stuff" break my heart a little every time I see or hear it.

[IWasThere2016]

I agree with Harry Potter.
Who needs forwards, FFS?

:greengrin


Ball is round, surface is flat, fit players should find space, pass to player in space, keep ball moving, shoot score... Simples. :cb

:aok:

[3pm]

It's easier to learn tactics at an 'older age' than it is to control a ball and / or develop your skills, decision making etc.

Emphasis should be on ball work etc at a younger age. Tactics and alternative styles of play can be picked up on throughout your 'education'.

[Stonewall]

Spot on.

I now try to minimise my match-day coaching other than good feedback and some very general stuff. I'd much prefer a player to make a mistake and then learn from it than not try something in the first place. I had an interesting chat with a Dad who in the early days told his kid "if in doubt kick it out". I went over the fact that I'd prefer them to work out when that is the right thing to do - I'd prefer them while theyre learning the game to try something, fail, even if it loses a goal so they can work out whats a good plan of action and whats not. Last thign I tell my players every week is try stuff and enjoy it.

Micro managing just makes players devolve responsibility. Teams where a great hoof is applauded loudly and a neat turn is met with "less of the fancy stuff" break my heart a little every time I see or hear it.

From what I've seen (certainly in West Lothian) the coaching of kids is pretty good to be honest and that with a few exceptions the penny has dropped and coaches and parents have accepted that the old ways didn't work and that the way forward is short sided games, long term developement more important than results and plenty of passing and positive feedback.


I try to give the kids responsibility too don't jump down their throats when they make mistakes. However, when I get frustrated I have to admitt I just shout at my own son.

What agegroup do you coach TC?

[Haymaker]

See these debates are so annoying and they always come back to the same issues that KIDS are not being coached correctly, this is where i disagree, i have been involved in coaching kids football teams for 10 years my current team i have had for 3 years and are now at under 16's all i ever do is work on passing and moving then on a sunday we come up against teams that play hoofball and end up losing


When I had that problem with my kids teams I simply took my two centre backs and two central midfielders down one end of the training pitch. I put myself between the CBs and, for a little practice, got my keeper to work on his kicking. I didnt move (but am obviously bigger than my CBs) but my CBs had to learn how to judge the ball coming through the high air and clear it properly and confidently.


While they learnt that I taught my CMs to drop back and then developed my CBs into winning and clearing the ball to one of the CMs to take possession and play on.


After two or three sessions of 20 minutes they were clear, confident and able to win the ball AND retain possession from a long ball. Hardly lost a game after that.

[ThirdManRun]

When I had that problem with my kids teams I simply took my two centre backs and two central midfielders down one end of the training pitch. I put myself between the CBs and, for a little practice, got my keeper to work on his kicking. I didnt move (but am obviously bigger than my CBs) but my CBs had to learn how to judge the ball coming through the high air and clear it properly and confidently.

While they learnt that I taught my CMs to drop back and then developed my CBs into winning and clearing the ball to one of the CMs to take possession and play on.

After two or three sessions of 20 minutes they were clear, confident and able to win the ball AND retain possession from a long ball. Hardly lost a game after that.

But did you manage to get them moving for each other at throw ins? If so you can have the job after Pat..!