The best in-form football team in London

[Batboy]

I'll bump this thread now if you don't mind! They are now under 11s and playing for the first time 11 a side. Over at wanstead flats. One of the boys has joined Arsenal football academy, several of the others are training with Tottenham kids academy and one with West Ham.
They are so far unbeaten this season played four and won four. an interesting step up to 11 a side. this is my third year involved with kids football and it is interesting to see the development at this level. not sure if there are others involved in kids football, but in light of the ongoing state of English National football it would be interesting to hear back any comments on coaching techniques and to why we are not producing English players and team to rival the likes of Spain, Italy Germany etc.

On a personal note my own son is In sparkling form and has been training with West Ham, although not quite made the kids academy there, not that it bothers me as I have seen a lot of broken kids dreams. The premier kids academies scour kids football looking for players but seem to have a take them in and spit them out mentality. The Fulham kids academy seems to focussed on size and atheletism, the Arsenal academy a reputation for high turnover. There are rumours of bungs going on with those involved with premier academies which is a real sad indictment of the game if true.

 

[kained&able]

Bungs all over the place. Other then west ham obviously.

I don't think our kids are any worse then anyone else. our u21's made the european finals, as did the under 19's and i'm fairly sure the u17's got to the recent final as well.
Our problem is stepping them up from u21 to full internationals and a general lack of technique compared to the dutch and spanish.

dave

 

[Batboy]

I recently spoke to a very good Dutch coach who coaches from under 11's to 18's his observations on the English style and approach is what he termed 'Determination Football' and cited the whole national psyche appearing to embed into this. He may have a point, from the professional clubs terraces to Hackney Marshes kids matches you have the screaming 'advisors' none worse than the parents. We then perhaps see the emphasis being weighted onto determination and effort (which of course is important) and not enough on technique.

It is making me understand more why in kids football they are banned from publishing results of say the under 8's kids teams, the emphasis trying to be taken away from the result of the game and more on development.

Maybe the technique aspect overtakes determination football once the players hit 21 and over.

The best kids football I have seen played this year was from another Hackney team who according to their coach have little involvement from their parents. One game I saw them play at Wanstead Flats, their coach bemoaned the fact that not one parent was in attendance and he had dragged them all up on the bus, I truly admired his commitment and perhaps the fact that they do not have 15 parents screaming at them helped, ok they were not winning many games but their skill, flair and technique was impressive.

 

[Batboy]

No bungs at West Ham , not sure about Spurs though!

 

[Streathamite]

<shakes head thoroughly>
"you'll never win anything with kids"...
<scarpers>

 

[1927]

The thread title begs the question who is the worst in-form team in London?!

 

[mattie]

I recently spoke to a very good Dutch coach who coaches from under 11's to 18's his observations on the English style and approach is what he termed 'Determination Football' and cited the whole national psyche appearing to embed into this. He may have a point, from the professional clubs terraces to Hackney Marshes kids matches you have the screaming 'advisors' none worse than the parents. We then perhaps see the emphasis being weighted onto determination and effort (which of course is important) and not enough on technique.

It is making me understand more why in kids football they are banned from publishing results of say the under 8's kids teams, the emphasis trying to be taken away from the result of the game and more on development.

Maybe the technique aspect overtakes determination football once the players hit 21 and over.

The best kids football I have seen played this year was from another Hackney team who according to their coach have little involvement from their parents. One game I saw them play at Wanstead Flats, their coach bemoaned the fact that not one parent was in attendance and he had dragged them all up on the bus, I truly admired his commitment and perhaps the fact that they do not have 15 parents screaming at them helped, ok they were not winning many games but their skill, flair and technique was impressive.

Bang on.

As Sir Trevor of Trickery has long said, we simply have to get away from physicality as the key factor*. His idea was smaller pitches where physical strength is more likely to play second-fiddle to technique, where it's not simply a case of who can kick it further and who wins headers, but a case of who can weave an opening.

My old boy coached my brothers' teams, I remember my dad having to tell a parent to shut up on many occasions, most memorably (and sadly) when they abused a 12-year-old centre-half for passing the ball to an opposition player instead of launching it up to the lanky striker.


Good luck to your lads!


* eta: interesting idea from Aussie rugby - apparently they don't split kid's rugby by age, but by weight (on a position by position basis, of course!) so that 'late developers' don't get crushed. I'm not sure how transferable it might be to football, but I think it's well worth noting that school year is not a perfect way to differentiate young kids.

 

[Balbi]

This thread is excellent.

I've taken to watching the sunday league games for the adults (which is furious swearing and such), nipping home for lunch and then catching the youth teams in the afternoons (no swearing, good coaching and some cracking players too). Makes a nice day.

 

[Batboy]

Bang on.

As Sir Trevor of Trickery has long said, we simply have to get away from physicality as the key factor*. His idea was smaller pitches where physical strength is more likely to play second-fiddle to technique, where it's not simply a case of who can kick it further and who wins headers, but a case of who can weave an opening.

My old boy coached my brothers' teams, I remember my dad having to tell a parent to shut up on many occasions, most memorably (and sadly) when they abused a 12-year-old centre-half for passing the ball to an opposition player instead of launching it up to the lanky striker.


Good luck to your lads!


* eta: interesting idea from Aussie rugby - apparently they don't split kid's rugby by age, but by weight (on a position by position basis, of course!) so that 'late developers' don't get crushed. I'm not sure how transferable it might be to football, but I think it's well worth noting that school year is not a perfect way to differentiate young kids.

Not sure that would work in football. The Clissold team have quite a few smaller players including a little whizz who turns players inside out. Smaller players can have a faster turn which is pretty essential on dribbling. Of course the disadvantage is on the physical aspect, the boy I just mentioned was with the Fulham kids academy for a year , new coach comes along and one of his rationales is bigger and atheletic is better, with that ethos Fulham would not of signed Messi as a kid.

I have seen several teams who have all large players and on 11 a side they simply play a thump and hoof game (back to previous comments on coaching and the whole 'win is everything' mantra)

On a slightly different subject my son was in trials for his district yesterday. My observations for what they are worth is

1) The virtual X factor approach/feel to it all, with kids and parents besides themselves at not getting through,

2) my son just failed to make the final cut he went through five trials and got to the last 21, with three boys being dropped, he being one of them. What I could not understand in the case of my son is they stuck him at centre half, he never plays centre half, he is more left midfield in funny enough the Brooking style, (weavy runs, trickery and killer passes) The coaches never compiled information on the boys as to what positions they play at club level, if they had told me that they were going to trial my son at centre half I would have told them not to waste their time, my sons time or mine for that matter (had to take day off work), he is never a centre half in a million years. Some might argue ahh you should be able to play in any position as in Total football, but ask yourself how good Bobby Moore would have been as a centre forward, How good Gary Lineker at left back?

The biggest disappointment for me at the district trials was not my son just failing to make the cut, but the whole predictableness of it, in the sense again we were back to 'determination' football. The trial match was against another district and the similarities in the boys play within both teams was for me clear, the emphasis primarily on speed and determination, there was some technique amongst the boys and clearly some talent, but you can't help feeling that a lot of that gets left behind through pressure from coaches and parents, even at district level.

 

[mattie]

Not sure that would work in football. The Clissold team have quite a few smaller players including a little whizz who turns players inside out. Smaller players can have a faster turn which is pretty essential on dribbling. Of course the disadvantage is on the physical aspect, the boy I just mentioned was with the Fulham kids academy for a year , new coach comes along and one of his rationales is bigger and atheletic is better, with that ethos Fulham would not of signed Messi as a kid.

I have seen several teams who have all large players and on 11 a side they simply play a thump and hoof game (back to previous comments on coaching and the whole 'win is everything' mantra)

On a slightly different subject my son was in trials for his district yesterday. My observations for what they are worth is

1) The virtual X factor approach/feel to it all, with kids and parents besides themselves at not getting through,

2) my son just failed to make the final cut he went through five trials and got to the last 21, with three boys being dropped, he being one of them. What I could not understand in the case of my son is they stuck him at centre half, he never plays centre half, he is more left midfield in funny enough the Brooking style, (weavy runs, trickery and killer passes) The coaches never compiled information on the boys as to what positions they play at club level, if they had told me that they were going to trial my son at centre half I would have told them not to waste their time, my sons time or mine for that matter (had to take day off work), he is never a centre half in a million years. Some might argue ahh you should be able to play in any position as in Total football, but ask yourself how good Bobby Moore would have been as a centre forward, How good Gary Lineker at left back?

The biggest disappointment for me at the district trials was not my son just failing to make the cut, but the whole predictableness of it, in the sense again we were back to 'determination' football. The trial match was against another district and the similarities in the boys play within both teams was for me clear, the emphasis primarily on speed and determination, there was some technique amongst the boys and clearly some talent, but you can't help feeling that a lot of that gets left behind through pressure from coaches and parents, even at district level.

Sorry to hear that, it's galling when it comes down to one person's opinion, especially when your son didn't get a fair crack of the whip.

Going on my own experiences (admittedly limited in youth football), many coaches themselves are judged on results and therefore want 'quick wins' and therefore aren't focused upon long-term development of technique and awareness. Sadly, many youth academies for professional clubs are similar - I recall speaking to an Arsenal youth scout who said he was after two of three things; speed, strength and skill, give him a player with two and he would work on the third later. I'd imagine Arsenal of all teams have moved away from that, but the whole point is that professional academies are supposed to be the pinnacle and to take lads in who have gone up the representative ranks, if talented kids are being missed at these rep levels then something is badly broken.

What I was getting at with the reference to the Oz rugby system was we need a way of breaking down the reliance upon physical size, and my suggestion was to shift the players who rely on physical size/strength up an 'age group' so that they can't rely on physique and have to work on skill. I agree entirely with Sir Trev in that we need smaller pitches so that physical size is less important and movement and skill become key. When I played as a kid we had summer 5-a-side tournaments, but obviously only the skilful and nimble players got picked, when ironically it was the cloggers who would really have benefited!

 

[bigbry]

The thread title begs the question who is the worst in-form team in London?!

Should that not read "who is the worst out-of-form team in London ?"

 

[1927]

Should that not read "who is the worst out-of-form team in London ?"

No.

 

[Batboy]

Sorry to hear that, it's galling when it comes down to one person's opinion, especially when your son didn't get a fair crack of the whip.

Going on my own experiences (admittedly limited in youth football), many coaches themselves are judged on results and therefore want 'quick wins' and therefore aren't focused upon long-term development of technique and awareness. Sadly, many youth academies for professional clubs are similar - I recall speaking to an Arsenal youth scout who said he was after two of three things; speed, strength and skill, give him a player with two and he would work on the third later. I'd imagine Arsenal of all teams have moved away from that, but the whole point is that professional academies are
supposed to be the pinnacle and to take lads in who have gone up the
representative ranks, if talented kids are being missed at these rep levels
then something is badly broken.

What I was getting at with the reference to the Oz rugby system was we need a way of breaking down the reliance upon physical size, and my suggestion was to shift the players who rely on physical size/strength up an 'age group' so that they can't rely on physique and have to work on skill. I agree entirely with Sir Trev in that we need smaller pitches so that physical size is less important and movement and skill become key. When I played
as a kid we had summer 5-a-side tournaments, but obviously only the skilful
and nimble players got picked, when ironically it was the cloggers who would
really have benefited!

Was having this debate on another forum . I think the danger is that we slide into a 'this is the answer' mentality. There are pros and cons in the idea of small pitches v large pitches. For me the answer lies in variety and a lot more organic encouragement for the kids. With small pitches there is a danger of creating five a side mentality and on larger pitches thump, hoof and run football (bit like Bolton! ), from where I am standing a lot of coaching drills I have seen in kids football seem a waste of time, I have just booked myself on a coaching course as I have got more
involved than I ever imagined and want to help my son develop and perhaps despite being over the hill drag myself out to play It is a great sport after all.

Anyway update on Stokie boys, still an unbeaten 100% record after 8 games they are progressing well in both league and cup competitions, not quite the
fluid football from the seven a side of the last two seasons and defensively 11 a side is a lot more challenging, but they are getting there. And apparently they will be getting feature in local rag and with not a WAG in sight!

 

[Batboy]

Well they made the local rag

http://www.hackneycitizen.co.uk/2010/11/04/clissold-rangers-storm-on/