Chicago Magic vs. Sockers Part II

I personaly would like to see the Chicago Wind teams be ranked better then the Chicago Magic in the state cup games rather then seeing sockrs vs magic in all the finals

 

I personaly would like to see the Schwaben teams be ranked better then the Chicago Magic in the state cup games rather then seeing sockrs vs magic in all the finals

 

Well all you have to do is win. Your U-18 team made into the finals with the Magic. So all you have to do is just keep winning and you will see the fruits of you labor.

 

Hmmm. This is just all so delectable. Don't know where to start.

Let's start with Magic North. My team of Ulittles just played them in a tournament, twice, once in pool and once in the finals. We won both.

a.) They had a lot of very nice athletes, really talented for their age.

b.) I was disappointed that rather than being coached to find the ball, they were coached to find the player. I'm sorry to say that their blatant roughness was met with worse roughness by my kids, who I jumped on immediately. WE DO NOT FOUL - especially at this age - bull crap on MLS and idiot World Cup commentators on the "professional foul." Let's teach the kids how to play on their feet and fight through adversity fouls, rather than perpetrate them.

c.) I was disappointed at the harranging by MN coaches at the refs. The tournament director said that during the finals one word to the ref would incur a $$$ fine. My philosophy is poor refs are a handicap that only makes the Ulittles stronger. Never, ever speak to the ref. If he's out to get you, it will only get worse. If he sucks, there's nothing you can do. If you intimidate him to make bad calls in your favor, you haven't played the disadvantage to your benefit.

d.) I was encouraged that after the match the coaches were up and up regular guys, and obviously had been swayed by the heat of the battle.

e.) Philosophically speaking I wish more coaches would focus on quality of play. Even after winning the final match, I told my boys I was both pleased and disappointed because we could have played much better. But they played their hearts out and we try to remember 4 positives for every negative. We want the Ulittles to love the game, so they can grow to be Ubigs.

f.) Finally, I think MN is a good strategy for the club. Find a place that has an indoor facility, base an operation around that facility, and grow your business. I'm quite surprised they haven't gone after the North suburbs by collaring the Lake Bluff or Waukegan indoor facility.

 

The good news, from my perspective, is that it gets better. I remember ULittles, the skill players would get brutalized. Nasty stuff. It's a lot better at U14 because the aggressive, less-skilled kids have learned some level of self-respect, and because the referees are tougher. Sure, you get teams that do use the professional foul on the top players, but not EVERY SINGLE TIME as can happen at U9, and generally the fouls are not dangerous, but rather tugs & trips.

 

Just finished a Futsol tournament at Soccer City in Palatine. No sour grapes because we took the 1st place trophy, but man, that ball sucks.

The dead futsol ball favors teams who lack footskills. The kids don't have to trap the ball well because it is dead, and they can over hit and miss hit their passes because the dead ball forgives an enormous amount. Also, they can kick the ball up, without having to worry about playing it on the ground because once it bounces it dies.

I cannot see any benefit to players using that ball - it just encourages poor skills, just what we need in the old USA - (I know it's played in Brazil, but quite often it moves from the beach game).

 

I find the benefit to be tactical. It's so easy to control that you can play faster in tighter spaces than would otherwise be possible. Bang, bang, bang.

Of course, that may not apply to ULittles.

I think the alleged technical benefit is just that, alleged. Brazilians are good technically because they play all the damn time, not because they use a futsal. Such is my belief.

 

I as well agree that Futsol helps, its a slower ball but makes the player act quicker with more control before your man is on you. bang bang bang. Its a great game, better I think than playing indoor with bang boards.

 

When dribbling and receiving, the low bounce Futsal ball does much of the work for the player because it doesn't explode away from clumsier touches allowing players to get away with poor technique.

When shooting or passing, the low bounce Futsal ball stays artificially low. In the world of Physical Education one of the key principles is specificity of training, i.e. making training as specific as possible to the real game. Because it is easier to keep the heavier Futsal ball low when shooting, players can be technically lazy yet still receive reward and reinforcement for poor technique. Players who have become familiar with striking a Futsal ball have to re-learn how to keep a normal soccer ball low when they return to the outdoor game.

By comparison with indoor soccer, Futsal wastes significantly more playing time because the ball leaves the field of play to a far greater degree versus playing with boards.

Furthermore, Futsal is played on a smaller field with a faster gym type surface than that of a traditional indoor field where the turf is designed to simulate real soccer field conditions. Therefore, the ball gets away from players and leaves the playing area far more often.

In indoor soccer players enjoy the maximum training benefit because the ball is always confined to the field by the boards and the game rarely comes to a full stop after an errant shot or pass.

 

Yeah, I remember. That does change with the older players, however.

Overall, I agree with you ... I never saw the big advantage over futsal and U.S. style indoor soccer, as long as with the latter the players were attempting to play true soccer, rather than just whack the ball off the walls and chase rebounds. Touches on the ball are touches on the ball.

 

This probably doesn't belong in this thread, but I believe your criticism of futsal comes as a result of taking a competitive view and not from a view of its use in training skills and tactical awareness. I think the problem is, we tend to view things in the here and now rather than what we are looking to gain in the future. The slower ball compensates for the faster surface out of necessity with younger kids. Consider how often it would be out of bounds with a regulation ball and imagine what the game would look like - soccer ping pong comes to mind. Remember too that the Brazilians are using this game with kids under 12 and are looking to develop a future game where the ball stays on the ground the majority of time. Those 12 year olds that are good enough will move onto the professional clubs where their education is expanded beyond what futsal can teach, but futsal has provided them with a pretty good foundation on which to build.

Frankly, I have never seen this to be a problem, at least not on the girls side. The more common problem I've seen is players who can't keep the futsal ball on the ground. However, I have seen kids have to readjust their game when moving to and from the various surfaces they have to play throughout the year when living in the north. Not a big issue though IMO, just a little annoyance.

 

To me the ideal indoor game is the one we play in many places here with similar indoor dimensions, but no boards. On turf, not hard floors, and with regular balls.

The lack of boards allows for space in the corners, which stretches the game out quite a bit. It really plays much like a small sided outdoor match. Second, I would say is the game with boards. Futsal would be last on my list.

 

I have mixed feelings about the lack of width in the standard U.S. indoor game. On the one hand, it severely limits the tactical options of an indoor match. On the other hand, it encourages the players to engage in combination ball up the middle of the field, which is a sophisticated activity, and one that the U.S. historically has not been very good at.

 

And I would agree, but futsal has some additional advantages and one is that a futsal court is easier and cheaper to come by. The problem is, we do not have that mindset yet to play just anywhere but in a formal setting.

 

Yes maybe, but I posted it because the tourn was at the Sockers indoor facility.

And therein lies the rub. The younger kids in this country are taught to play the game way, way before they are taught to learn to control the ball. While the highly creative player is everyone on the field in the rest of world, that same player is highly prized in USA, because he's so rare.

Yes, the futsal dead ball compensates for a fast surface, and is a crutch to those without the skills to control the ball. We saw this first hand at the tourn. Halfway through the tourn. - surprise - the ball was switched from regulation to futsal - imagine that - with already half the games played they switched the balls. Immediately the teams that were athletic but couldn't control the ball due to poor footskills, were now competitive with the much better refined players.

And that is exactly what the dead ball does for Ulittles, to their detriment, and that was exactly what the tourn. organizers wanted, closer games, repeat customers.

Hey - no problem here, we still won the tourney, but we're not out there to win, we're out there to think long term which means to play well and to learn, winning is purely a by-product. As a coach, after two of our wins, I told the boys I was disappointed in the way they played and encouraged them to re-think the way we play to play better, with more skill, etc. etc.

 

Usually Sockers motivation to host a tournament is to make $$$$$$$$$, having little or nothing to do woth improving players.

Sounds like they found a way to create revenue with the little fileds.

For the merits of the game I know nothing

 

The elite girls teams I know that play futsal tend to be the most skilled players regardless of the ball. The girls teams that I know who are dependent on athleticism alone (speed, strength, and size) will play their game based on those qualities regardless of the ball. If the ball used forces those girls to play a more controlled game, how is this a bad thing?

You are saying they are getting away with using bad technique (because they bring the two types of teams closer together competitively). I am saying, they are learning how to control the ball which will lead to better technique. At ULittle, isn't that what it is suppose to be about?

 

Gonna drop this one. There is a good deal basics here that I don't want to re-hash again. Appreciate your thoughts.

 

I know that Region II ODP is going to Costa Rica with the 1989's, Argentina with the 1991's and France with the 1990's. I know of Magic players going with the Region; are there any Sockers players on these trips?

 

YOU KNOW ITS FUNNY..ME AND MY WIFE WERE TALKING ABOUT ESSENTIALS IN SOCCER..AND SHE ASKED ME.."WHY DONT THE COACHES,OR SCOUTS FEEL THE SAME WAY IN BASKETBALL OR FOOTBALL IN AMERICA?..I DONT KNOW WHY..CAUSE THEY TAKE 7 FOOT AFRICANS AND PUT THEM ON A PROFESSIONAL LEVEL WITHOUT THE FUNDAMENTALS BEING DOWN PAT....IT SEEMS THE REASON IS BECAUSE OF THE FREAKISH ATHLETIC ABILITY OR SIZE..FOOTBALL THE SAME THING WITH SPEED..AND STRENGTH....COUNTLESS TRACK STARS HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN FOOTBALL..I THINK YOU GUYS OVER ANYLIZE SOCCER AND ITS TIME YOU STARTED LOOKING AT THE PLAYER THAT DOESNT HAVE "ALL THE SKILLS" DOWN PAT BUT IS SUCCESSFUL...DROGBA,HENRY,WAMBACH..AND OTHERS.....
"IF YOU CAN PLAY..YOU CAN PLAY"...SIMPLE AS THAT...THERE IS .CERTAIN THINGS THAT YOU NEED TO BE GOOD IN SOCCER..AND I THINK OTHERS AREAS CAN HELP....WE JUST PUT TOO MUCH STOCK INTO AND FEEL GOOD SAYING CERTAIN PLAYERS DONT OBTAIN THAT SKILL WE DECIDE THAT IS IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO MAKE THEM THE BEST OR GREAT...NOT ME..FREDDY IS FAST ENOUGH AND HAS GOOD ENOUGH FINISHING ABILITY..GOOCH LOOKS GOOD DISPITE THE CRITICS...AND THEIR IS A LONG LIST OF OTHERS......THEY NEED TO START PICKING OUT THE BEST ATHLETES AND PLAYERS WITH THE MOST POTENTIAL INSTEAD OF PICKING UP "LIL BOBBIE"..CAUSE HIS PARENTS PAID FOR HIM TO LEARN HOW TO JUGGLE AND PROPERLY BOOT THE BALL WITH A CURVE...THE ATHLETES CAN LEARN THOSE SAME SKILLS WITHOUT THE TIME OR ATTENTION NEEDED FOR NO COORDINATION HAVING LIL BOBBIE...
"THATS JUST MY OPINION THOUGH"

 

Hey Tupac - lose the CAPS. Try again. You cannot just step on the pitch and play, those footskills are difficult to master. Bouncing or catching a ball is a lot easier. You might see 7' Africans playing basketball, because they catch, turn, bounce, stuff.

 

If it's all about the athlete, then why is it that you're talking about a 5' 6" guy who is quick but not all that fast.

Oh ... it's not all about the athlete, is it? It's about playing a whole lot from an early age. Maybe Lil Bobbie had the right idea, after all.

 

That's some funny stuff, amigo.

 

Yeah - I thought so too. I didn't even know how to touch that one, Drogba, Thierry Henry - no skills - huh - which universe is that?

 

I disagree..for the most part they are just tall and coachable..look all im saying is some people dont play football,baseball,or basketball untill highschool..as ive said countless times my daughter started at the age of 5 playing futbol.(so im not talking about my kids..lol)...the mls draft had some kids they said lacked ball controll and being comfortable with the ball.."yet they made it to the mls"..so alot can be taught they must think.......you can only go so far with quickness and speed..cant teach that really its genetics