If I understand correctly, the "correct" receiving technique these days is to let the ball pass across the body and receive with the back foot. Why? As a forward I almost never received a ball while stationary or facing my own goal. There are some times when it is advantageous to let the ball pass across your body and receive with the "back foot," but in my experience it is rare for a player under pressure. If I am running in the same direction as the ball, I usually want to touch the ball as early as possible, which means with the nearest foot. If I am running toward the ball, I usually want to touch the ball with my front foot because my marker is chasing me. So why are we teaching kids that it is bad technique to receive with the front foot? I remember once in an over 30 match an opponent "corrected" my technique when I chose to receive a ball with the outside of my front foot. (It was called the Coaches League for good reason!) The ball hopped over my foot and went out of bounds. It was laughable because of the circumstances--the only play I had before the ball went out of play was with the outside of my front foot while sprinting which is also why my toes were pointed correctly for sprinting but incorrectly for receiving. I am all for learning to receive with every legal part of the anatomy. I am against telling players there is only one "correct" way to do anything.
I hadn't heard that you receive with the back foot necessarily. I would think the only negative about receiving with the front foot is it could move the ball too far in front of you if your touch is too hard, but that is just my physical sense. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G925A using Tapatalk
I understand what you are saying, as a forward that the situation of getting to the goal requires that 'quick touch' in order to get in on goal. That makes sense. Many of a player's touches do not result in a rush to go to goal. Working with my 12 yo's, who are not saavy on moves, dummies, and really general soccer IQ yet, I am trying to reinforce a habit that trains if the ball is coming in one direction, there is also likely ball pressure coming from there too. Taking it with the back foot (funny that I - and many other coaches I work with, always call the foot across the body the 'front' foot), allows a touch further away from pressure and set themselves up to move the ball and/or as you turn puts you in better control of the ball. Of course you can play it with the outside of the front foot as well and beat pressure and set up the next move (we do practice these moves as well), but this helps us with the inexperienced player's desire to touch the ball with the closest foot which also would likely give the defender less of a length to shut down a player or reach the exposed ball.
You receive with your backfoot so you open up to the field. It's a control-and-turn combo. Another benefit is that you're "always" supposed to put two feet in between ball and the defender to protect it. Receiving across the body accomplishes this. I keep it simple by saying "receive it across your body", but another one of our coaches has it more accurate: receive with the foot furthest from the defender. Especially when playing possession or rondos. Receive with your front foot and you're limited to (most of the time) only a return pass. Across the body allows you to play a switch or play forward more efficiently.
The grammar is slightly wrong. There's a silent/implied "Body open to the field" receive on the back foot 99% of the kids in the US, you put them on a field with an opponent, no matter how close the opponent is, they will turn their back on the opponent and receive. So still most likely letting it go across their body/ taking it on the back foot. But then they have to turn, but have no idea where pressure might be. And they have no idea where the rest of their team is. If they're open to the field and receiving on the back foot, they can see the opponent, see where the next play should go, where their first touch should go. Then they can start working on the times when a different surface is appropriate.
You receive the ball with the front foot you are forced to pass the ball on the same side you got the pass from. Meaning pass the ball back into the pressured side. You receive on the far side foot you can pass or dribble to the far side of the field where the pressure should be less then where the original pass came from.
I think the terminology can be confusing. As others have said, you want to receive the ball such that you're facing the way you want to go, usually upfield, and the inside of the foot is typically the best surface to receive with control. To receive properly, though, it's not just about the foot. It's about your entire body shape and position. If the ball is headed towards the "wrong" foot, and you have time, you should adjust your entire body so you're in position before the ball arrives such that you can receive it correctly. If you do receive it properly, you are already facing the way you want to go, and you are set up for your next touch. You can play quickly. Receive with the wrong foot, and you are facing way from the field and your teammates, your options become limited, and it takes longer/more touches to turn the way you want to. Often it's the difference between keeping the ball and going forward or losing the ball entirely. Small things get magnified at a higher speed of play. And I think the whole "play the way you're facing" thing is a bit misleading. If you are preparing your body correctly, you need to "face the way you want to play" whenever possible.
Thanks. I think I understand the rationale now. It is really not about technique, but rather about tactics. I much preferred to be in motion, facing in the right direction, receiving the ball. So I didn't think about receiving the ball, I thought about what I was going to do before and after my first touch. In my experience the "foot closest to the ball" and the "foot furthest from the marker" is usually the same foot. If it is not, somebody screwed up. Such as passing to foot when I made a blind side run wanting a pass into space behind the marker or simply making an inaccurate pass. When I was passing, I would not always send the pass to the player's proper foot. There were times I would send the ball into space leading my teammate to turn to a better position. That is much faster tactically than sending it to the proper foot and then telling him to "turn and carry." Kind of opposite of yelling "man on."
When Steve Sampson had the US national team. He made the same coaching point to one of his players. He said it because the play kept using the foot closes to the ball and kept passing back to the pressure side. Some players actually made fun of Sampson for making such an elementary coaching point. Sampson just tried to remind the player to do it because the player was not doing it. He lost their respect for him as a coach. Look what John harkes did to him when Sampson wanted to make him a back for the good of the team. I never liked that Sampson tried to act like a father figure to his players. I think he thought it could work because he was physically bigger then his players. I never did it to my adult players because I was not their daddy just their coach. I was there to help them with their game and to win games and nothing else.
Funny. The guy that I nail for poor English/grammar in other threads just gave the best, most simple answer.
Well the clearest explanation to me was GKbenji's. The way I would explain it is that when marked you receive the ball with the foot further from the opponent, which should be the foot nearest the ball. If not marked, then you let the ball cross your body and receive with the inside of the foot furthest from the ball. I would compare it to tennis: get your body into the right position and muscle memory (technique) will take care of the rest. It all goes out the window though when you are under pressure and the pass is bad. Which in my experience happened a lot. Then you just do what you can to get to and win the ball. Same for tennis: sometimes you don't have enough time to get your feet in the ideal position so you just do the best you can to play the ball.
If you're working on this in the standard 4v1 square, this notion of receiving with the foot further away from the passer is as much a point of emphasis for the PASSER as it is for the RECEIVER. And, if the passer doesn't put the ball where it needs to go, it does break down quickly. In my experience, it is an eye-opening concept for the younger player to recognize that it matters -- it's not good enough just to pass to teammate "x", but it makes the difference whether you pass to the left or right foot! As noted above, the answer to your question is about keeping the body open to the field, which in turn should mean creating additional options for the subsequent play. If you have time/space, by taking ball across your body, you open up to the field in front of you, and more easily give yourself the option of playing the ball away from where is came. If you don't have time/space, you may not have a choice, and there are certainly times when you want to use your body to shield the ball, as you've noted. In the 4v1 setting, it is contrived by the fact that they are playing in a box but you see the impact immediately. If they receive with the "wrong" foot, it often means that they only have one option -- to pass back to the person who just passed them the ball. As noted above, this can be the fault of the passer, but it can also be the "fault" of the receiving player, who didn't move deep enough to create the wide supporting angle. If you've moved early, you can receive the ball across the body and facing the field; if you haven't, limit your options.
In my O30 match this past week, had an incident. Teammmate was facing me about ten yards away. He had a defender on his left shoulder closing fast, so I played the ball to off to his right—to move him away from the oncoming defender. He though the pass was inaccurate, I beg to differ. It was just a half step to his right and even though I zipped it because of the oncoming defender he should've dealt with it. Blech's comment just reminded me of passer's role in selecting what foot/side the ball should be played. But if he had been side on, bodyshape open to the field, I would've played him front foot with a "no turn" shout.
I can see now why coaches focus on that coaching point. I never used a "4v1 square" game (if that game is what I suspect it is). I taught receiving technique as pure technique, never mixing in tactics. I began tactics with 1v1, teaching them to keep the ball on the foot furthest from the opponent. Then I taught 2v1, which introduces the tactics of passing and receiving the ball with the foot furthest from the ball. Obviously players should be two-footed. I never taught that it was "wrong" to use the "back" foot (or make any other tactical choices). I taught them that they had choices and the advantages and disadvantages of the choices. Personally when I dribbled I would "show" the ball just out of reach to entice a commitment from the opponent and then move away in a different direction. So there is a time when putting the ball on the near foot is an advantage.
I don't think they're ever completely separable. Your technique can influence your available decisions, and which decision you make can influence what technique will work best. In this example, creating proper body shape and receiving with the correct foot (ostensibly pure technique) profoundly affect the choices you have to then play the ball. Conversely, If you decide to go one way or the other, turn or shield, will affect what technique you want to use to receive. Agreed that there is no one "right" way to receive the ball, but there are rules of thumb (like "receive with the back foot") that will help guide those techniques and tactics.
I always think of it as the other way around--circumstances drive the choice of surface and what to do with the ball. Again tennis very much influences my thinking. You practice perfect positioning endlessly for ground strokes, but sometimes in matches you can't get your feet around in time so you do the best you can to make the play. Service is different. Perfect technique every time. Just like golf swings. I agree that in the game tactics is ever present. But I teach techniques outside of the tactical context. That is the introduction. After that all the skill development exercises for the technique mix tactics and technique. Instep drive technique is a good example. On youtube you can find 100s of clips showing instep drive technique, invariably in a dead ball situation. But rarely do players strike dead balls during the run of play. When I introduced striking technique the first exercise was with dead balls. After the first exercise no more dead balls.
I usually ask players to position their body facing both where the ball is coming from and where they want it to go next. Then, I usually just say: "receive with the foot closest to the direction you want to play next." These rules apply to receiving under pressure, in space, or on the move. Of course, yes, receiving does require more improvisation when receiving under pressure.
Well, I think the same points apply. The difference is that most players struggle to read the situation correctly, because there are too many variables.
There are a lot of variables, even in SSGs. I suspect a lot of what some call laziness in youth soccer is really confusion. A lot of parents never played and don't appreciate the player's viewpoint. While I routinely switched players into different positions, I considered the player and didn't give them too much of challenge. For instance I would move a novice player from Left FB to Left Winger. This is a pretty easy adjustment. The Left FB experience is related, because the player is seeing what is happening in front of him and the orientation of the field is consistent (touch line on the left, support to the right).