WOFP for kids - especially 7th and 8th grade

Kids 7th and 8th grade matches under the Whole of Football plan are horrible in my opinion.

With tiny pitches, no goalies, 5 outfield players a side we get a wonderful game of scrum where the ball spends most of the time either within the scrum or being kicked out of play.

In my opinion these two grades are getting a rough deal.  I coached these grades a few years ago with my oldest child, whose team were miles ahead of where the current bunch are and who were playing good passing football at the equivalent time.

I pointed this out to Capital Football when it was brought in a few years ago, but their response was to insist that this was ‘world best practice’.

What a load of codswallop.

I would far rather ditch the ‘Festivals’ at the moment cos the kids aren’t gaining by it – might as well stick to our normal skills sessions within the club.

What do others think?

What do the kids think?

It was while ago, but when I organised and coached juniors for 20 years I took a lot of trouble to find out what children liked and enjoyed while playing football. They liked (a) real matches (b) proper uniforms (c) proper goalposts. Of course they needed to learn skills but that is what the weekly practice was for, and as they got older the Coca Cola skills tests worked wonders for focussing their minds on skills.

At that time we invited parents to tell us, at the end of the season, what we were doing wrong. We got hardly any comments and those mostly concerned minor or fringe matters. Oh yes, we also produced three future All Whites. And I do not much like the Whole of Football.   

People often think change is terribad.

Evidence is overwhelming that fewer players and a proportionate pitch makes for more touches and better technicians.

Evidence is also pretty strong that young kids don't really get league tables and shit like that. Parents sure do though...

Wofp seems like a pretty logical thing to me for the most part.

Hold on Smithy. We played 6-a-side for young ones (first three years) on small fields. Then 8-a-side (fourth year). And no points tables (first four years).

They were "playing good passing football at the equivalent time".

Key words here. At seven, they still need to be acquiring skills - teaching them to pass, and trying to enforce two-touch and the like is restricting their technical development and maybe even making them scared of the ball - if you yell at them to pass it every time they receive it.

Research, try it.

My daughter first played junior football (pre WOF days) and never touched the ball in a whole game. First Kicks etc gives them time on the ball and can learn heaps more.  Has my vote.

I still think shouting is the way to go.

Yer not a lot has changed there either. Still has my vote.

Who wants to be a goalie at 7 years old? And 20 years ago there was by and large a fairly low number of really good technical players. Some great readers of the game, and certainly fast enough too, but actual technical ability was not something we saw a lot of. 

Scientifically speaking, I am now curious as to how many youngest brothers were better technically than the older, bigger and stronger boys. Bit of a tangent, but I shall look into it. 

Anyway, the WOFP is tops in my opinion. There, I said it.

Smithy seeks to infer that my generation's regime was opposed to change. Far from it. In fact on my watch in Wellington we converted the younger ones from 11-a-side to 6-a-side and wrote some rules to suit. To do this we listed all the rules being used in Canterbury, NSW, England, US and Canada and found that most rules for small sided footy were universal. Offside: NO. Penalties: NO. Rolling subs: YES. Corners: YES. Fields 35m v 25m:YES.

We had doubts about goallies and kick-ins v throw-ins. We opted for no goallies and for throw-ins. After one year we changed to goallies because the children made it clear that was what they wanted. They saw goallies on the TV wearing gloves and that was their choice.

I think it's crap. When our Little Dribblers finish and head off to club football they know how and when to throw the ball in, what a corner is, where to go when it's a goal, who to look for when a decision needs to be made.

They head off to WOF, have no corners, no throw ins, no goalkeepers, no lines and no refs? How do they know when it's out or in, who's ball is it or is it even a goal? If adults, who know about football, can't get by without a ref, how are 5/6/7 year olds supposed to manage their own game. WOF is probably a great practice session but get some proper games going each week where they dress up in their club colours and go to a properly marked out pitch and learn to deal with the emotional part of football when they play a game.

How can you thoroughly celebrate a goal when there is no whistle or ref to say "Goal!"?

My oldest is in 8th grade this year and I think it's great. The size of the pitch and format still works well for 7-8 year olds.

I think if you can see the kids bunching up or the game is not that flash then that's why the coach is there isn't it? To help them work it out. Good coaching on a smaller pitch to a smaller number of players has a much bigger impact than chucking them on a bigger pitch just because that's what seems more like 'real' football.

And trust me - the kids still now how to celebrate a goal. They don't need a grown up in a black uniform with a whistle to help them work that out.

Maybe it's Little Dribblers that needs to adjust to best practice, not the other way round.

Some interesting view points there.

VimFuego says his kids gets more touches.The quality of those touches is pretty questionable when you a have a 5 v 5 scrum of people on top of each other with each child trying to get a punt in.

Shushy asks who wants to go in goal at 7.  Pre-WOFP in my 7th grade team everyone took a turn - goalkeeping is one of the skills that will teach the kids a lot about football.  Smithy says the winning and the league tables aren't that important , and Id agree with that, so nothing much is gonna be lost by giving anyone a turn in goal for a while. It doesn't have to be for long.

But playing without goalies - whats the point? It doesn't improve the game any, in fact it makes it a joke cos players are realising they can shoot from anywhere and score, and are preferring to do that rather than try and dribble through an impossible10 man scrum. That doesn't help anyone to get more touches. And in the 9th grade they are going to have goalies anyway.

HelloBeaver says "At seven, they still need to be acquiring skills - teaching them to pass, and trying to enforce two-touch and the like is restricting their technical development and maybe even making them scared of the ball - if you yell at them to pass it every time they receive it."  Good points. But we have a 5v5 scrum on a tiny field and my most advanced player aint gonna dribble through that lot himself. So one skill to be acquired is how to avoid that scrum, and encouraging them to pass around the scrum is pretty much the only thing you can coach them to do, except to shoot from anywhere, which is what some other coaches are doing.

Loftus Road says that kids like real matches. I can vouch for that , for when I was a kid all any of us wanted was the match time. I remember a few coachs putting us through the 'skills' but it wasn't well received , that's for sure.

So my improvement on the current 7th and 8th grade set-up would be to stay 5 a side, but to have a goalkeeper who is regularly rotated. This leaves 8 on the pitch instead of 10, which gives 20% more space!

SumFootball, I don't know where you are based, but the WOFP 7th and 8th grade Festivals in Wellington have a marked out pitch, team colours,goals and a ref! Just no corners or throw ins, and no goalies

Nets!

 My boys have played all the football mentioned so far (in all positions) and they adapt to any rules on the day, they want to see the net bulge in the oppositions goal!

Smithy it was a bit funny back in 1980 when U-8 reps used to play on full sized fields. I recall a team was taking a free kick for an offside. They were 100 yards from goal, and playing into a howling gale. The ref was dutifully signalling "INDIRECT".

**Didn't have much opposition to the switch to 6-a-side.    

Yeah!

I think that THAT one thing would make one hell of a difference. I possibly would still make the pitch a little bigger than it currently is, but would give it a go with 8 outfield players first.

There are other concerns with the WOFP that either I have or others within the club seem to have. Loftus Road said that kids like matches, and I agreed with him, but the current WOFP has an emphasis well away from that. I do try to make the training 'rotations' interesting and relevant , but my biggest concern is that the WOFP plan is about doing things by the book, rather than letting the coach decide whats best for the kids at any time.  I look at the kids at a particular time and like to decide things like - they could do with better trapping skills, or they could do with using the other foot more, or they need better understanding of goalkeeping or they need more shooting practice etc. Not to have some head coach come over and say you will run three sessions of 'flag tag' today with four lots of kids, most of whom you don't know.

I have heard that one grade has rejected basic concepts of WOFP because all the coaches (mostly parents) have decided they want to coach their own kids, not participate in a rotation.

So what is better than what we did before - from my perspective not really very much. At the end of the day, why don't we let the coaches do their job - which is to coach. If Capital Football want to run things to a set regime, then they can employ the coaches themselves, and then see how many kids they actually get to turn up

I've been coaching the WOFP for three years now and have absolutely no problems with it at all. Great programme. In fact, I think anyone who's got issues with it is just looking to find fault.

The structured nature of it is the whole point. The drills all focus on different aspects of development to ensure the kids get a balanced approach not something that's lopsided just because some dad decides they should practice shooting, or tackling, or whatever at the expense of everything else.

It also means that kids around the country are getting basically the same programme for their age, making it easy for them to move between clubs or regions, and also easy for them to step up to the next level. The consistency of delivery is a good thing not bad.

It seems some people haven't realised the programme is for the benefit of kids not adults.

Because that's what we did for 25 years and we produced a generation of footballers who weren't much good?

Hold on there: I rather thought that generation with four Wellington lads in the team went unbeaten at the World Cup, were rated 22nd at the cup by FIFA, and eliminated Italy. .

Terminator - You got it in one! Best Practice!

Fenix By marked out do you mean lines, halfway and a circle in the middle? or just a box

Shushy has banged the nail on the head.

I don't want to be rude but the fact you're using phrases like "better trapping" tells me you're actually not very well placed to manage the development of young players.

I have loads more confidence in a well thought through (if prescriptive) system.

Usually with change some are not happy initially but move on quickly if they see the merits. With wofp two to 3 years down the track, and a lot of parents coaches administrators and players still divided on its merits , tells me something not quite right

I'm sure a lot of people were divided about slavery being abolished a few years down the track too. Doesn't mean it wasn't right. 

Certainly comparing apples with apples there 

I'm comparing logic. 

Back to Broonie's point. I wonder if any continued unease on WOF is due in part to the fact that a lot of parents' first experience of WOF is simply so different to their previous football experience - either as an adult player or when they were kids themselves.

You know they teach this weird thing in maths at primary school these days where the kids use "strategies" to solve a problem.

In my day we used formulas.

Still it seems to work with these young uns....

I think so.

I think too many parents look at First Kicks and Fun Football, in particular, and it doesn't seem like real football to them so they get nervous. Of course the whole point is that it's not real football because the kids are nowhere near ready for that.

As a coach I've actually tried to front-foot that a bit by explaining to some of the parents that it's actually all very well thought out and designed to teach the kids the core skills within a fun, fast-moving framework. Enjoyment, touches on the ball and scoring goals are much more important at that age than worrying about throw-ins, corners, tactics etc.

Is a downside that the parent coach doesn't get to follow their kid around the stations?

I've never found it to be a problem. I still coach 4 out of 6 sessions involving my son the way it's run at Island Bay (I take the first session with my team, then two sessions with other teams, back to my team for the small sided game, then 2 games against another team).

As Gings says the rotation provides a bit of variety which is good for everyone.

Unless you're the kind of helicopter parent who won't let their kid take a shit without being there to wipe their arse, of course.

Dear Mr James Dean

The size of pitches for 11 year-olds has not previously been mentioned in this discussion. I welcome the fact that these children are playing on smaller pitches than they did in the 1990s.