Regional Football - powered by Park Life

Changes to junior football?

73 replies · 7,999 views
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
nightz wrote:
The last few posts have been about schools 1st 1x's. Theres more kids that dont make the 1st x1 than do. Should these kids just drop out, as many currently do?
 
The other funny comment that is always thrown up is "let them play with their mates". Are the kids they have been playing with at their club for the past 10 years not classed as "their mates"?


A lot of schools in wellington only have a first xi anyone else will still play for a club.  The bigger schools do have age group teams and the same rules generally apply - you are expected to play for those teams in preference to any club team.

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

A potential problem with 'solution 1' may be that not all schools have the depth that allows for this: kids exercising their right to join the club my deplete school resources to such an extent that a school team fails (do not assume that all the kids could or would want to go to the local club for extraneous reasons).



Excellent point, and one I have been arguing as a problem in the other direction with the proposed solution from Capital Football of giving all 15 year olds and above to the Colleges. 

What about the kids who go to a non-football college?  CF suggest they will be able to remain with the clubs and play in the college league.  But will the clubs have the numbers to have teams?

What about the kids who are not good enough for 1st or 2nd teams but still want to play footie because they love the game.  In most colleges there will be limited opportunities, but the clubs will also have very few bodies to make teams.  Sorry Joe, we don't have numbers to make a team.  Come back next year!

 
Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
But the same thing happens now so CF aren't creating a new problem are they?

I'm not clear on what they're proposing.  If it's a combined club/school league then happy days if they can get it through.

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
[QUOTE=smithy246

I'm not clear on what they're proposing.  If it's a combined club/school league then happy days if they can get it through.
[/QUOTE]

Your PM box is full.  I was going to send a your a breakdown of the proposal, but as I said in my email of 17th January, this proposal has been put on hold for 2008.

What I believe is of more importance in junior football this season is the changes being rushed through to team sizes.

Basically the research suggests that we play full sized teams on full sized pitches too early.  As part of a 3 year implementation plan to lower this level, Capital Football junior teams will have their player numbers reduced each year until 2010.

Note:  No team will have less players than they had in the previous year, they just will not increase as quickly as the previous team structure.

For 2008 the team sizes are

    2008    2007
6th      4        6    Note
7th      6        6
8th      6        6
9th      7        8
10th    8       11
11th    11     11



6th Grade is currently only played as a Capital Football league in the Hutt Valley.  This is a hangover from the assimilation of the sub-associations.

Needless to say, Pitch sizes that these games are to be played on will also be adjusted.

By 2010, 13th Grade will be the point that teams actually get to 11 a side on full sized pitches.  However it appears that the entry point for competitive leagues will remain at 10th level Promotion Grade.  Therefore JPL will be played at 11th and 12th Grades with 9 a side by 2010.


I have mixed feelings on this.  The research suggests it is a good idea from developing skills.  Other factors may impact on it.

This was implemented in United Soccer Federation after a document headed 'Soccer Development 2002 and beyond'.  However, 5 or so years after implementation, no-one can tell me if any research has been done to see if it's working.
Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
I dont know whats happened  but i casually look at Capital Soccers Website at Junior Results and Programes... Can anyone answer why these two following things have happened?
 
* I see now there is no Under 16 Federation or Rep Teams...
 
When i played as a youth less than 10 years ago i made Reps and Federation up to the age of 16 and it was to an excellent standard.. The coaches would recruit players from both club and colleges. Whats happened?
 
* Everything Under 15 and over in the capital soccer competition is to a poor standard...
 
I know for a fact its not because they are all playing for school but i do know that a medium percentage would be...
 
Any thoughts?
 
 
Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Sorry...too many messages...cleared now.

From a coaching perspective it's fairly valid.  On a smaller pitch you get more regular touches and under more pressure so developmentally it's great.

There's plenty of research supporting its efficacy so I wouldn't imagine anyone here would fund a replication of studies that have been done overseas.

The big question is: "Do we have sufficient pitches in Wellington for it to work?"

Some say yes, others no, but to be fair to Capital Football the best way to find out is to give it a go.  If it works it will be good for the game.

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
reefside wrote:
I dont know whats happened  but i casually look at Capital Soccers Website at Junior Results and Programes... Can anyone answer why these two following things have happened?
 
* I see now there is no Under 16 Federation or Rep Teams...
 


Rationale:

1. Elite players over 16 should be catered for in the National Youth League (now the Team Wellington Academy).

2. Cost of having district reps at U16s vs quality means it's of questionable value.

3. Not sufficient coaches of quality to run U16 Representative Teams at a district level.

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
smithy246 wrote:
reefside wrote:
I dont know whats happened  but i casually look at Capital Soccers Website at Junior Results and Programes... Can anyone answer why these two following things have happened?
 
* I see now there is no Under 16 Federation or Rep Teams...
 


Rationale:

1. Elite players over 16 should be catered for in the National Youth League (now the Team Wellington Academy).

2. Cost of having district reps at U16s vs quality means it's of questionable value.

3. Not sufficient coaches of quality to run U16 Representative Teams at a district level.
 
Get with the times. There is no such thing as under 16 or under 15 or under anything unless you are a school team.
Its now called 14th grade, 15th grade etc.
There are 15th grade rep teams for both Districts and Federation

A dog with a bone :)

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
smithy246 wrote:
Sorry...too many messages...cleared now.

From a coaching perspective it's fairly valid.  On a smaller pitch you get more regular touches and under more pressure so developmentally it's great.

 
Thats just total BS. On a smaller pitch its easier for 1 player to dominate a game. You dont need to pass the ball so much so lesser players dont get as many touches and became bored. On the size pitches they currently play on kids are forced to pass the ball more and hence get more touches. It also helps the kids develop vision.

A dog with a bone :)

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Moving college matches to midweek isnt a bad idea. I remember Hibs never used to play in the saturday league. It is never going to happen though.
 
But here is how a 1st 11 players schedule for the week would go:
 
Monday: school 9am - 3-pm
Tuesday: School 9am - 3pm, 1st 11 training 3:30-530pm, club training 6-8pm
Wednesday: school 9am - 12pm, 1st 11 traditional 1-3pm
Thursday: school 9am-3pm, 1st 11 training 3:30-5:30pm
Friday: school
Saturday: 1st 11 game 10:30-12:30pm, club game 2pm-4:30pm
Sunday: reps?
 
The problem there is the double ups in training and games being on the same day. Too much football!

Allegedly

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
hibs played mid-week because they could still qualify for nationals or second-tier natonals up until a couple of years ago when college sport changed the rules s that you had to play in the saturday league if you wanted to get qualifcation to these tournaments.
Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
nightz wrote:
smithy246 wrote:
reefside wrote:
I dont know whats happened  but i casually look at Capital Soccers Website at Junior Results and Programes... Can anyone answer why these two following things have happened?
 
* I see now there is no Under 16 Federation or Rep Teams...
 


Rationale:

1. Elite players over 16 should be catered for in the National Youth League (now the Team Wellington Academy).

2. Cost of having district reps at U16s vs quality means it's of questionable value.

3. Not sufficient coaches of quality to run U16 Representative Teams at a district level.
 
Get with the times. There is no such thing as under 16 or under 15 or under anything unless you are a school team.
Its now called 14th grade, 15th grade etc.
There are 15th grade rep teams for both Districts and Federation


Someone took their clever pills this morning didn't they.

Have you not noticed that it's the FIFA U17 World Cup etc etc?

Who gives a sh*t anyway as long as we all know what we're discussing.

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
nightz wrote:
smithy246 wrote:
Sorry...too many messages...cleared now.

From a coaching perspective it's fairly valid.  On a smaller pitch you get more regular touches and under more pressure so developmentally it's great.

 
Thats just total BS. On a smaller pitch its easier for 1 player to dominate a game. You dont need to pass the ball so much so lesser players dont get as many touches and became bored. On the size pitches they currently play on kids are forced to pass the ball more and hence get more touches. It also helps the kids develop vision.


You're wrong, but there's not much point in me trying to change your mind is there.

The fact is that kids on a big pitch spend most of their time running, and f**k all time on the ball.

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
i think smithy is wrong 2. bigger pitches means you learn to play as a team.
Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
smithy246 wrote:
nightz wrote:
smithy246 wrote:
Sorry...too many messages...cleared now.

From a coaching perspective it's fairly valid.  On a smaller pitch you get more regular touches and under more pressure so developmentally it's great.

 
Thats just total BS. On a smaller pitch its easier for 1 player to dominate a game. You dont need to pass the ball so much so lesser players dont get as many touches and became bored. On the size pitches they currently play on kids are forced to pass the ball more and hence get more touches. It also helps the kids develop vision.


You're wrong, but there's not much point in me trying to change your mind is there.

The fact is that kids on a big pitch spend most of their time running, and f**k all time on the ball.
 
HAhaha. Thats why my than 9yr was always told to either get in goal or restricted to 2 touches as on a small field he had no need to pass the ball and the rest of the team didnt get a look in. on a big field they soon learn that passing the ball is better than spending the whole game running as you suggest they would do.

A dog with a bone :)

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

You've just agreed with me.

On a big pitch he has to get rid of the ball.  So what's he doing when he hasn't got the ball: running.  Even if he did hold the ball on a big pitch it's going to take days for someone to close him down, so he doesn't learn to play under any pressure.
 
On the small pitch, if he's good enough to keep the ball under pressure, that's superb.  He's getting loads of touches, trying things, and learning.  He doesn't have to worry as much about losing the ball, because it's not a ten mile run to get it back.  He doesn't have to wait so long to see the ball again if he loses it, because there are fewer players in the game.
 
More touches = better first touch, more skill, better technique.
Smaller pitch = more touches.
Therefore it must follow that Smaller Pitch = Better, more skillful player.
 
Restricting a 9 year old to 2 touch is the worst idea I've ever heard.
 
If I'm not enough of an authority for you (and fair enough) then take your pick of these countries - their approach to youth development is all based on small sided games for children:
 
1. Holland.
2. France.
3. Germany.
4. Spain.
5. USA (okay maybe not the best example, but still...)
6. Denmark.
7. Sweden.
8. Portugal.
 
In fact, to the best of my knowledge, the only country in Western Europe that has been reluctant to adopt smaller teams for kids is the United Kingdom, specifically England, and look at all the great technical players they aren't turning out! 
 
 

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
from my memory - juniors consisted if the biggest guy on the field playing centre back- and giving it the mechanical boot hoof whenever it came near him. Didnt make for a quality game. Get the kids on the small fields - and free up the big ones for the big boy sh*t

Founder

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
I also vote for small pitches.
Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
I also vote for small pitches.
 
its not a vote

Founder

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Give me a break, just got off a boat.
Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
smithy246 wrote:

You've just agreed with me.


On a big pitch he has to get rid of the ball.� So what's he doing when he hasn't got the ball: running.� Even if he did hold the ball on a big pitch it's going to take days for someone to close him down, so he doesn't learn to play under any pressure.

�

On the small pitch, if he's good enough to keep the ball under pressure, that's superb.� He's getting loads of touches, trying things, and learning.� He doesn't have to worry as much about losing the ball, because it's not a ten mile run to get it back.� He doesn't have to wait so long to see the ball again if he loses it, because there are fewer players in the game.

�

More touches�= better first touch, more skill, better technique.

Smaller pitch = more touches.

Therefore it must follow that Smaller Pitch = Better, more skillful player.

�

Restricting a 9 year old to 2 touch is the worst idea I've ever heard.

�

If I'm not enough of an authority for you (and fair enough) then take your pick of these countries - their approach to youth development is all based on small sided games for children:

�

1. Holland.

2. France.

3. Germany.

4. Spain.

5. USA (okay maybe not the best example, but still...)

6. Denmark.

7. Sweden.

8. Portugal.

�

In fact, to the best of my knowledge, the only country�in Western Europe that has been reluctant to adopt smaller�teams�for kids is�the United Kingdom, specifically England, and look at all the great�technical players they aren't turning out!�

�

�


you beat me to it.

Nightz. . . .

On big pitches you are kidding yourself that there would be more passing vision because of the extra space, All that would do would create a mob mentality because the children at that age are underdeveloped and need to work with quicker turnover of play and more touch opportunities because of that.

As for vision, that is easily remedied because in a 4 v 4 and 6 v 6 SPGs, you learn to use width and depth of the whole small pitch effectively, creating small team combinations/patterns very similar in many small areas around the 11 v 11 full sized pitch.

It teaches the kids to play the short pass game which is the building unit of the full game. "if you learn to play the short pass game you learn to play the long pass game better." Most kids would not be able to kick a ball that far in a full sized pitch but on the small pitch they learn quick short passes and combinations.

Quick passes with suitable pressure teaches the kid to learn to pass the ball accurately and quickly, hereby improving foot agility and body position for optimum performance in skill and technique.

With the quick turn over of ball, the ball gets to be shown to all the other players so there is no single player dominating. In the full sized pitch game, there will be at least three players dominating with plenty of space and less pressure and less resistance. In a SSG, any domination of a player is never too long without any loss development opportunities to the other players in the game.
Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Do you guys even know whats being proposed here or even understand what size pitches these kids are currently playing on and what ages we are talking about here?????

I think you need to take a step back see whats been done currently and whats wrong with it. The only current problem from my on view is the age that some kids are moving up to a full size pitch and full size goals.

A dog with a bone :)

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
(edited to get rid of some html garbage in the middle.  Sorry)
Implementation of this proposal has now been delayed for the 2008 season.  The working parties will continue to "work on defining the issues and proposing solutions to them" in 2008.

However, there will be some major changes to junior football at the younger age levels.  Basically the research suggests that we play full sized teams on full sized pitches too early.  As part of a 3 year implementation plan to lower this level, Capital Football junior teams will have their player numbers reduced each year until 2010.

Note:  No team will have less players than they had in the previous year, they just will not increase as quickly as the previous team structure.

For 2008 the team sizes are

    2008    2007
6th      4        6    Note
7th      6        6
8th      6        6
9th      7        8
10th    8       11
11th    11     11



6th Grade is currently only played as a Capital Football league in the Hutt Valley.  This is a hangover from the assimilation of the sub-associations.

Needless to say, Pitch sizes that these games are to be played on will also be adjusted.

By 2010, 13th Grade will be the point that teams actually get to 11 a side on full sized pitches.  However it appears that the entry point for competitive leagues will remain at 10th level Promotion Grade.  Therefore JPL will be played at 11th and 12th Grades with 9 a side by 2010.
 
Okay, assuming this is what is being proposed, I think it's great.  9 a side on a reduced dimensions pitch will be great for 11 and 12 year olds.  As long as the pitches are scaled correctly I can't see any negatives from a player development perspective.
 
The big issues are:
a) where are these pitches going to come from, and
b) will we be able to manage the increase in the number of teams.
 
But those are practical problems, not problems with the theory or the idea.
 
 
 
 

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
I might be convinced for 11 yrs olds but 12 yr old JPL players are ok on a full sized pitch. I do think 12 and 13's would be better off having smaller goals though as it would encourge better shooting skills. 
 
It should also be remembered that kids develop their skills more through training than what happens in a 40 min game on Saturday.
nightz2008-01-23 16:06:16

A dog with a bone :)

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
Agree.  Whether it's 12s or 13s is a moot point really.
 
Also agree about training, sort of.  Remember that the quality of some of the training being run at U11s is questionable!  So some may actually do much of their learning in the game!
 
 
 

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
I thought we were talking about your 9 year old (U10) here?

Well my advocation would be to have 4v4 for U-6 through U-8. I agree that a goalkeeper needs to be introduced at some stage and I am happy for this to take place at U-9. However, I would suggest playing 5v5 or 6v6 including the GK at U-9 and U-10. U-11 is where I would begin 8v8 with 11v11 beginning at U-12.

These SSGs are ideal for the kids for to learn each progression unit group stage of the 11 v 11 game on the right sized pitch. So when they would be appreciate of some of the specialist positions being introduced while retaining the basic essential positions of the team when changing from the 6 v 6 into 8 v 8 and then 8 v 8 into the 11 v 11.
Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
It amuses me that we are now all agreeing with each other having been two steps off homicide about three posts ago.

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
We are also all agreeing, at least for the most part, with what Capital Football are trying to do.  So yay them.

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
smithy246 wrote:
Okay, assuming this is what is being proposed, I think it's great.  9 a side on a reduced dimensions pitch will be great for 11 and 12 year olds.  As long as the pitches are scaled correctly I can't see any negatives from a player development perspective.
 
The big issues are:
a) where are these pitches going to come from, and
b) will we be able to manage the increase in the number of teams.
 
But those are practical problems, not problems with the theory or the idea.
 
   


c) The other implementation issue is where the clubs are going to get the volunteers to coach/manage these teams..  Unfortunately so many parents seem to think that you pay your sub, and that will fund a Uefa A coach for little Johnny.


Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

smithy246 wrote:
Okay, assuming this is what is being proposed, I think it's great.� 9 a side on a reduced dimensions pitch will be great for 11 and 12 year olds.� As long as the pitches are scaled correctly I can't see any negatives from a player development perspective.

�

The big issues are:

a) where are these pitches going to come from, and

b) will we be able to manage the increase in the number of teams.

�

But those are practical problems, not problems with the theory or the idea.

�



    
c) The other implementation issue is where the clubs are going to get the volunteers to coach/manage these teams..� Unfortunately so many parents seem to think that you pay your sub, and that will fund a Uefa A coach for little Johnny.


I'm sure Jacques Vercauteren would be more than happy to cater for such demands
Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
JV wishes he had a UEFA A.

Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
I thought we were talking about your 9 year old (U10) here?

Well my advocation would be to have 4v4 for U-6 through U-8. I agree that a goalkeeper needs to be introduced at some stage and I am happy for this to take place at U-9. However, I would suggest playing 5v5 or 6v6 including the GK at U-9 and U-10. U-11 is where I would begin 8v8 with 11v11 beginning at U-12.

These SSGs are ideal for the kids for to learn each progression unit group stage of the 11 v 11 game on the right sized pitch. So when they would be appreciate of some of the specialist positions being introduced while retaining the basic essential positions of the team when changing from the 6 v 6 into 8 v 8 and then 8 v 8 into the 11 v 11.
 
I dont have a 9 yr old, read the post again.
 
What size teams do you think the kids have now? 
 
You need a GK from 6th grade upwards or you will be having kids scoring from half way. Each kid usually takes a turn at that age unless there is one that really wants the position.
 

A dog with a bone :)

Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
nightz wrote:
I thought we were talking about your 9 year old (U10) here? Well my advocation would be to have 4v4 for U-6 through U-8. I agree that a goalkeeper needs to be introduced at some stage and I am happy for this to take place at U-9. However, I would suggest playing 5v5 or 6v6 including the GK at U-9 and U-10. U-11 is where I would begin 8v8 with 11v11 beginning at U-12. These SSGs are ideal for the kids for to learn each progression unit group stage of the 11 v 11 game on the right sized pitch. So when they would be appreciate of some of the specialist positions being introduced while retaining the basic essential positions of the team when changing from the 6 v 6 into 8 v 8 and then 8 v 8 into the 11 v 11.

�

I dont have a 9 yr old, read the post again.

�

What size teams do you think the kids have now?�

�

You need a GK from 6th grade upwards or you will be having kids scoring from half way. Each kid usually takes a turn at that age unless there is one that really wants the position.

�


Oh you were talking about your kid when he was 9.

I'm not from the CF region and have been coaching with senior players for over 6 years. But I am aware of the latest children/youth development research tho. Accordingly to the other post, the changes are fairly close in line of what I advocate.

As for the GK speciality, you don't need to work on that until U9. To have a kid shooting from half-way is what is needed. We need to develop creativity and develop risk taking as well. Also the same things can occur from the kids on the other side. The kids with very little guidance from coach can learn the benefits of using width and depth of the small sized pitch. We would then develop young players who are able to backtrack and defend an open goal after being on an attack. Therefore developing future defenders and stronger attackers with more creativity and accurate shooting from long distance. All of which we need to develop early.

Let explain how it really pans out . . .

With the 4 v 4 kids are taught to spread and position themselves to make full use of the small pitch area as well getting into position to receive the ball from a fellow teammate. Good unit coordination and learning basic tactics and learn from simple mistakes that we still see often from senior/elite level in NZ.

5 v 5 would still be without a GK. At this stage you are developing away from the basic diamond shape in a 4 v 4 game. This means that instead of the 1-2-1 formation of the 4 man team you had for the last couple of years, with an extra player, you have two different formation to explore. These two formation are 3-2 or the 2-3. With the knowledge of the basic diamond of the 4 man team, the young players here will start to learn these two formation which are the basic strategy formation of 3-2 counterattack formation and the 2-3 playmaking strategy. The goal are still without GK because we are developing personal tactical awareness with these players in these strategies.

6 v 6 we are now developing GKs and therefore players learn to cope with accurate shooting as well as sticking with either 2-3 or 3-2 depending on the game situation however it means that more ball turnover and learning build-up starts from the GK.

7 v 7 we are now developing two player types; a central defensive midfielder and a central attacking midfielder. The two formation are 1-2-1-2 on defensive and 2-1-2-1 on attack. With basic counterattack and playmaking strategies from the season before, the flow from 1-2-1-2 to a 2-1-2-1 is learnt with the central defender changes to the central midfield on attack but is back to the central defence when the other team has secure firmly the ball possession. Also the central midfielder is central midfield on defence in a 1-2-1-2 but then becomes the central attacker when going on attack and of course the central defender takes his position in the central midfield. this also means that the GK learns central sweeper position when on attack since the central defender takes the central midfield position. So essentially you have a single (4 man) diamond shape on the defence and then two (4 man) diamond shape on attack thus retaining the basic unit structure of the 4 v 4 SSG but now developing counterattacking in a 4-2 and introduce wing play as well in a 3-3. The change of pace and space relies more on individual moments and player talents. The size of the pitch is important, field must be small enough to allow allot of attacking opportunities but large enough for building up play or the ball will sail over the heads achieving little but a fast paced hustle game.

If you introduce 1-3-3, 1-4-1, 2-3-1 or 1-3-2 formations you are introducing specialization too early and only for one season and so creating long term disadvantage for the players for results. Those formations are for senior tactics and not for young players development. So you should avoid using them.

8 v 8 The introduction of the central midfielder allows a central striker and central defender to develop their most basic task but also develops a key player to the team who learns to develop his attacking/defensive responsibility within the game. It allows the outside backs to press forward. Also introduction of a real/actual midfielder is a development curve to balance opportunities and responsibilities. He/She has to master turning and receiving in order to pass forward, learn how to hold behind the top players as support and go past them when needed. 8 v 8 retain the 4 v 4 structure still with two (4 man) diamond on both defence and attack.

All these SSG are developmental benefit to the young players up to the age of 11.

Now you introduce 11 v 11 at the age of 11 as well as the full sized pitch. With 9 v 9 and 10 v 10 variations to understand for coverage for red cards incidents.AllWhitebelievr2008-01-24 17:55:55
Permalink Permalink
about 18 years ago · edited over 13 years ago
At K.C.U ive just finshed 14/15s and now either have to play for my school or adults league

im doing both atm because ive played jr in the mornings and adults in the avo for the last few years

Permalink Permalink