Youth soccer game coaching tactics (what are the most rediculous)

U6 and U8: On kickoffs, line three or four players on the midfield line near the touch line in a bunch, like an onside kick in football, and have the player on the ball kick it downfield in their direction so they could pounce on it. Never worked.

 

In U6 I'd have my kids scatter among the short half we started on. This opposing coach wanted all five of his players on the center circle standing next to each other, to "block" the kickoff. I kindly told him his kids would probably get hurt, as kids at that age love to blast kickoffs. After a couple of kickoffs he changed his mind on that tactic.

 

In 1984 as I was walking by a field, a U8G coach, a burly Army major in BDU uniform less hat, in a huddle with his team during a water break was passionately exhorting his players to go out there and "kill" the opposing players (other 6 and 7 year old girls), to "kick them" and do other violence against them. The girls and parents calmly watch his performance and then the girls calmly return to the field, ignoring his instructions. No doubt it was his view of teaching fundamentals.

I remember it so well because I was a soldier in the same unit at the time and quite embarrassed by his conduct.

 

In a U-Little, no goalkeeper format game, doing any of the following:

- Stationing a kid (or two) to stand in front of goal as handless goalkeepers

- Blasting knockoffs at the goal

- Taking shots from midfield or further away

 

If coach directed, I agree. But in my experience, these 3 are often just done by the kids.

 

Coach's job is to make sure they don't employ any of these tactics though. Pretty easy to stop all three from happening. If you don't stop it from happening (at least from happening repeatedly), it's just as bad as encouraging it to happen.

 

2&3...I might agree.

1....no. I had some kids no matter how much I'd holler at them, they'd plant themselves in front of that pug.

 

Yes, the tendency is there in some kids, but it can be broken. In scrimmages and games, continually encourage them to move up. In scrimmages, put an arc or box around the goal that they can't go into. You can even take the kid and tell him you don't want him even in his own half of the field for a half a game or some other length of time just to help break him from the habit of camping in front of his own goal. Over time the tendency will lessen.

 

I would bet that in your situations there was some parent coaching behind your back. I have seen it happen from the parent's perspective (because the parent would not hide their coaching from other parents thinking they would approve of the tactical "improvement"), and I hate it. Even when I completely disagreed with what my child's coach was doing (which was often) I did not contradict the coach, because what message does that send your kids? It basically teaches them to be "uncoachable." It is a catch 22 for parents. You have to support the coach as long as its not a safety or integrity issue. When the kids were older, I could talk about contrary views with them, but explain that they needed to follow the coaches direction. Teaches two points for the price of one.

 

Yes, you're probably right. But I think good coaching can eliminate these tactics in competitive games. Without good coaching, your program won't work regardless of format. So the issue is more about whether you have good coaching than whether your format includes competitive games.

 

You are spot on about the need for good coaching, but good coaching is needed during training sessions. No coaching is needed during matches. And of course poor coaching during matches is worse. There are two aspects to the bias against matches, expecially in zone 1 where skill development is the primary objective.
1. Too many matches reduces training time which is far more valuable to skill development.
2. Matches where scores are reported and tracked for league standings are a negative for player development because it causes adults to emphasize match results over player development, and its better for the kids if they start every match with a clean slate, i.e., no concerns about past mistakes and no downside for player mistakes during matches, focused on playing in the immediate match. We want kids to be competitive, not the coaches. We don't want the risk-adverse culture that too often develops during "competitive" league play.

Competitive matches are unnecessary for development until you begin training to compete, and that is not until the high school varsity age level. In fact organized teams are unnecessary until zone 2 when you start teaching team tactics.

 

Agree with all except the "no coaching is needed during matches" part. I give lots of what I call "verbal cues" to my U7 players during matches, like:

1. "Dribble"- to encourage them to dribble rather than kick the ball when they receive it.

2. "Find space"- to encourage them to lift their head and find a good spot to dribble into rather than head down and dribbling into defenders.

3. "Push up"- stated to any player hanging out too far back from the play. It's OK to be behind the play, but close enough to provide support.

4. "Give him support"- stated to reind the players without the ball to stay engaged and get into a position that can help the dribbler.

I see absolutely nothing wrong with any of these instructions. And I can tell you that my players all now know to dribble when they receive the ball, to find space when they are dribbling and to push up and provide support when they don't have the ball.

 

For what its worth I did the same thing during youth matches. I was the "12th player" on the sideline where I would communicate in the same manner that I was teaching the players--e.g., yelling "man on," etc., and congratulating players on good plays. I even congratulated opposing players for good plays. Sets the example that I want--friendly competition. I see nothing "wrong" with positive technical instructions during a match either, but it is not necessary to development.

What is necessary for development is your assessment of their match play so you can plan your next training.

 

This is one theory, but I disagree with it. I believe that learning will happen faster with young children if they are given contemporaneous instruction and feedback. With my U7s, we train on Monday nights and play games in our house leage on Saturdays. If I say nothing during the Saturday games, I view that as missing an opportunity to teach them something. If I wait until Monday to tell the players not to kick the ball away when it comes to them, they're going to shrug their shoulders and not know what I am talking about. If I see a player on Saturday running at a rolling ball like he's going to blast it up field and I say "Dribble!," and he does, then I just accelerated his learning process.

This is to be distinguished from "joystick coaching." I'm not micromanaging them. I'm recognizing tendencies that need to be eliminated (like clearing the ball, hanging in front of our goal, etc.) and giving them verbal cues to eliminate those tendencies. Over time, their bad instincts are replaced with good ones. On the teams we play against, nearly all of the kids blast the ball when it comes to them and everyone yells "whoo, hoo, great kick!" Kids stand in front of their goal and block our shots and everyone yells "whoo, hoo, great save!" Those bad tendencies will never self correct and will be reinforced by wrong headed praise from the sidelines.

 

I think you make a good distinction between instruction and joysticking, and at the younger ages I think that feedback is important. I haven't coached at those very young ages, but in the several years I've spent doing U12-U15 I've employed a slightly different tactic. I coach the kids next to me on the sidelines rather than focusing as much on the players on the field. So if I see a player make a mistake on the field, I have a brief discussion with the guys on the sidelines about the decision or action that the player made. Emphasis on discussion, because I try to encourage my players to talk about the game with me rather than just absorb everything I have to say. I also very frequently point out examples of great play to the guys on the sideline, and I briefly break down how it was accomplished after asking my players how they think it was accomplished.

I've found that having this type of discussion with the players on the sideline is more engaging because 1.) it's easier to communicate with a player on the sideline than on the field 2.) I can have a discussion on the sideline, whereas a player on the field can only listen 3.) when the players on the sideline go into the game and find themselves in the situations that we've discussed, they'll recognize that and look to me after the situation for a brief comment or thumbs-up, and we're then on the same page. I think this whole method just fosters more thinking on the part of the players, but I admit I haven't coached very young players (U10 or lower) and this method would definitely be more difficult at that level.

 

I've come full circle on this topic, from joystick coach to silent coach to tactical reminders only. One of the best things we did as a staff this season was schedule a once weekly joint practice with another team in our club so we can run a working scrimmage where we can stop play whenever we want to and take restarts multiple times. All the stuff you want to yell from the sidelines during a match you can teach while right next to the player during the scrimmage. You can even ask them to run with you, not just telling them what to do but showing them as well.

 

In our U7 house league, the coaches are right there on the field as well, not on the sidelines. So sometimes it's more like I'm whispering "dribble" in their ear. I'm like their giant Jiminy Cricket!

 

To make this even more ridiculous My daughter's U13 team, playing at the highest level, just played a team on Tuesday that employed this on every restart from center of which they had (5). Looked like a hail mary formation, we were laughing (quietly) on the sidelines.

 

Ayso game very young kids. Indirect kick close to goal the coach of the defensive team told then to get to the side of the field. Then told the keeper not to play the ball. So there were two players near the ball. One player played it to the other player and he shot and scored.

I guess the coach thought if the kid shot it on goal and no one made the second touch it would not count.

 

Because I say coaching is unnecessary during matches, don't confuse me with an advocate of matches for zone 1 players. I don't favor organized teams for zone 1. I have consistently argued for replacement of the typical league/team structure with academy structures and ad hoc teams prior to U14.

 

In U12G rec we played a team that had these set throw-in "plays" that the coach triggered by a code word, based on something the girls would apparently understand. I'm not sure that they had any affect on the failure or success of any particular throw-in.

The ball would go out on us, the other team got the ball on the touch line and their coach would yell, "Lady Gaga!...Lady Gaga!" or "Taylor Swift!"

Me --->