Over the past few years I have watched hours and hours of US college soccer from D1 and D2 following the progress of four English players who I have known as a grassroots coach. I have also attended a few summer camps where I assumed the inability to cross ('serve') the ball was just a deficiency of players who were never going to reach college level. Then I remembered that many, many years ago I spent a few summers running the line in New Jersey youth soccer and it all came flooding back - US youth soccer has a Dracula complex: a fear of crosses. Let's start with the players and by players I mean American born. I see few classic wingers who can beat and defender and cross a ball with reasonable accuracy. Some can beat a defender but are unable to float a cross with any feeling for weight and spin. Too many are 'Turn back Tonys' who try to cut inside for a hoped for strike on goal instead of taking it to the end-line and crossing. Why are US players so reluctant to go to the endline? But you don't have to get past a defender to put in a cross - David Beckham made a very good career despite being an average dribbler. You can simply combine with an outside back in an overload and deliver a good ball i between keeper and defenders. But very few outside backs deliver a crosses either because they are not able to do it or are not encouraged to do so. Why not? And don't tell me it is about formations because teams play with a single striker in some kind of 4-5-1 formation. The wide player on the other side and the No.10 should be reaching the box to get on the end of deliveries. And one of the reasons for playing 4-4-2 is precisely because you can have at least two players on the end of crosses. Perhaps the problem is a shortage of strikers who are good in the air. But if they never receive any crosses how will we ever know? Maybe it's a chicken AND egg problem? Feel free to tell me I am wrong. No, I am not saying we need to revert to British football in the 1970s but players and teams should be able to mix up their attacking player. PS. I may change my mind if you can list half a dozen Americans who made it in Europe as wide players. But you can't...
I see the opposite. I see wingers who can beat the defender and deliver the cross and #9's and #10's that are not making the runs into the box or not timing correctly their runs.
I see an American aversion to bravely FINISHING At All Costs at the end of these crosses from the WIng.
It is articles like this that may have some influence. I know a few college coaches who have site such articles to there players. But your last line "and teams should be able to mix up their attacking player" is why it is necessary part of the game. https://soccerment.com/crossing-eff...ITY OF SCORING A GOAL,crosses to score a goal.
I was raised on crossing the ball. Get it deep, and send it across. I haven't emphasized that in my own coaching, but that hasn't necessarily been a conscious decision. Perhaps, I've subconsciously picked up the thesis of @MySonsPlay's link. For my -- admittedly low-level -- teams, it doesn't seem like a particularly viable option so I haven't focused on encouraging it. Don't get me wrong, I try to get players wide so they're an option to progress down the field, but I'm not teaching that for the purpose of whipping crosses in to my 9's head.
2 Reasons for this in America in my opinion: 1) Space - outside of the top tier academies, training space is hard to come by for the (vast) majority of youth players in this country. Think 6 teams on a field for training 3 nights a week and consider lack of ability to train longer passes with accuracy. While many clubs do have plenty of space, a lot more are fighting for it in all areas of the country. 2) Its ineffective. This article below shows a great comparison of all the top leagues in Europe (the game is relative). In the article, it states that it takes premier league sides an average of 67.46 crosses before scoring, how can we expect any better from college players that are less talented? https://spielverlagerung.com/2015/06/22/an-ineffective-tool/.
Thanks for joining in. I have just watched two more matches - one D2 and 1 D1. To be fair, one of the D1 teams combined down the wings quite well but the crosses were poor, which was a shame because they had the beating of the outside backs. They looked like they were being coached in attacking play and they had a big striker but he didn't get a single ball to attack. The other D1 team... no comment! Otherwise, I stand by what I wrote. I see players who simply do not have the technique to deliver a cross towards a team mate never mind whip it away from the keeper or float with some backspin. I see strikers who just shrug their shoulders as if it's a normal experience while the wide midfield players on the other side don't make the run. How can technique be so poor among 20 year olds? P.S. Sorry for the typos in the original post but I think you got my drift.
Fair enough @Wazzaville. And I should have specified that I mainly watch female soccer and in another country. My guess is that if college players don't have this skill - how are they going to get it? Where will they have the time to go out and perfect their cross when they play 2 games per week? summer break? I love a cross on a counter attack. So it's definitely a skill everyone should have. Agree that when you practice on smaller fields your crosses and long balls can be perfect, but then get to the larger field and they're terrible. My CB player has this issue when trying to switch the play up. My concern with US female college soccer is the lack of soccer IQ.
I think generally speaking crosses are considered a low-skill play in US soccer, probably due to inaccurately fetishizing Latin soccer and watching too much of Spain during their 2008-2012 run. Crossing was a big part of rec league play when I was growing up in the 90s and early 2000s. The only drill I can remember doing in pre-game warmups for my high school team was a crossing drill. If anything crossing used to be over-emphasized in US youth soccer by unsophisticated coaches who didn't know how to break down defenses in a more technical fashion. Maybe the pendulum has since shifted? Crossing is really effective at younger ages and against unskilled teams. You don't even need to be good at crossing. Just put it over the near-post defender and watch the ball bounce around the box until (hopefully) one of your team-mates pounces on the ball. However, once you finally start facing competent defenders, a lot of players and coaches probably just give up on crosses. Also, for most American youth teams both skill and athleticism are distributed very unevenly amongst the players. Thus, if you have a guy who is fast enough to get behind defenders and whip in a cross, that guy is probably your striker, not your outside midfielder. Likewise if you have a guy who is skilled enough to dribble around a defender and put in a high quality cross, that guy is probably your central midfielder, not your outside midfielder.
Really - a space problem? That is interesting. The stats refer to Man U under David Moyes who goes to the other extreme in my opinion. In any case, I am also referring to the fundamentals - the ability to beat an opponent and to deliver a cross with reasonable accuracy. For sure, it makes your attacking play much more predictable if you can't get to the end line and whip in a cross.
Final comment: I watched another D1 game last week. Of course, one of the teams would have to have a very good right midfield player who sent over several good crosses in the first half. His delivery was so good he stopped trying to beat the tenacious outside back and just served them up instead. Unfortunately, his only target was the admittedly tall striker but, as someone mentioned earlier, his life did not seem to depend on getting on the end of them. For some reason, the coach moved the right midfield player over to the other side of the pitch at half time where he was much less effective. Anyway, I checked the roster afterwards and the player was English... Couldn't understand why the coach was not loading the box when he had a player of such ability. Maybe that's why they lost...
Here you go. https://go.traceup.com/traceid/athlete/EPRuFlYbL/moments/6327223 This was somewhat the case for my son's U17 team this year. He could cross when playing the outside forward spot but often there was no good target. When he played (his preferred) center forward, the crosses coming to him were not as good.