Go or Stay - Your Thoughts.

I would have thought a team playing counter attacking football was a theme of its Italian coach yes. Getting unsung players to gel into that system is due the skill of the Head coach.

Our national side has an open door to the best methods, best principals .. I would state the FA four corners while sound in theory falls way short of other Countries development models, that is a fact simply backed up by simple coaches v population ratios - The ratios are not even close to a Countries like Spain. Astronomical wealth in England is not spent on the best principles and methods. Basic coaching methods like Coerver are a mystery to too many here.

 

That's the first title I think he's ever won, so why hasn't he been successful anywhere else?
Right time, right place, right players on form, minimal amount of injuries, team gelled, catching other teams unaware, catching other teams out of form..Odd bit of lady luck.."Bobs your uncle"....
More or less the same team this season, he failed...Answers on a postcard why that might be..........all of a sudden he's a bad manager!!

As to our national side....it's simple...our young English players are not properly coached, never have been...From early age onward.....to me, stands out like a sore thumb.....Spanish, Italian, German, S American players are so much more comfortable on the ball, technically far more superior.......in my opinion...Watch England players with the ball, more often than not, not got a clue what to do with it (hot potato)...And as for the idea of running into space giving options is far too complicated for most of them..
Until we address that at an early age...we will win nothing.

 

Right time, right place, right players .. Right system. Leicester winning the title was not down to luck it was down to methodology and maximising opportunity with minimal possession by playing into areas = Counter attack and elements of pomo. He plays obvious shapes and tempos and defensive formations ... Which was the science of a amazing success.

As to our national side....it's simple...our young English players are not properly coached ... Which clearly means Kids are not having the opportunity to experience the best methods, best principals .. The science of success is not being observed nationally.

 

You haven't answered why the following season he failed, did he all of a sudden forget the science aspect?!! It's not science in any shape, it's what worked with what players he had, that's not science that's common sense.....they gelled as a team, like we did under GJ first season of championship. You are over complicating football, when in reality it's a simple game.

As to your theory regarding the national side & kids, depends what you mean by best methods and best principals. Question is, what are the best methods & principles? What is properly coached?
You can't just come out with words that are obvious......Stop with all this science nonsense, there is no science in football whatsoever.

 

Leicester clearly lost focus this season and that collective will. Leicester's system of play was not complex. Counter attack, press, play with tempo. Football of few risks and underpinned by % football and Pomo (positions of maximum opportunity), the ball was played into specific areas to exploit - It was not accidental, and it was studied. A degree of science.

Regarding kids football there are schools of thought that best practice involves football being broken down into stages and from ages 5/6 - 11 technique should be taught above all else. Basic theory is that the more time kids spend with the ball, the more touches they have, the more proficient they will become. Approaches can be viewed as scientific because children will be viewed individually, different learning methods will need to be utilised as we all do not learn in the same manner, and players develop and learn at different rates.

To acquire technical ability kids have to be exposed in football that is not risk averse, where skill is encouraged and players are allowed to make decisions themselves without constant coaching from parents. The more yelling parents and coaches do the less kids think .. That is grass roots football very very often.

Approaches should be studied, improved / altered over the season to improve facets of the players game . Booting a ball around once a week in training and playing Wembley down the park will not make significant improvement to a kids game.

The above is a loose description of how the Spanish and other top nations start kids football education. It is part of the FA's thinking, but does not have the coaching framework to implement it, and the educational support behind it for clubs and parents to help a technique first culture develop.

The idea that there is science behind the above is no nonsense.

 

It was also down to the likes of Man City, Chelsea and co dropping more points than they should have.
I'm taking nothing away from Leicester's remarkable achievement, but they were helped at times.

 

It's not science, it's training to command.....None of the above indicates to me that football is a science....it's a game which can have technicalities within..
Football as with fashion changes with time to accommodate audience/rich owners needs. Think about it!! What's pleasing to the eye.....entertainment = goals. wrap strikers up in cotton wool, diminish of tackling.
You can dress it up all you like.....It's a simple game.

 

And gelling with inform players all at the same time...

 

Nowhere have I said football is not a simple game, however I'm said Mr Johnson complicates the simple.

Many teams apply data to simplify and interpret football. It is a studied approach (science like) - Put is there the likely success = %. Your passing level via prozone/sportscode is %. Simple.

Football is a game of marginal gains. Do this, this and this better fractionally these gains will make me a better rounded player. Training to command is futile if a player (kids) cannot do what is asked - I view how that can be taken and turned into a success via breaking down the technicalities into progressions, trap it, move it , increase the tempo into recorded performances as being science like. Simple.

A team and individual will also have their own needs. Team needs - Stamina and fitness - High tempo football couple with high pressing will need players with high fitness levels - Monitoring cardio levels, bog standard bleep test ... It is science. Simple.

 

And then You can have a manager like Big Sam or Pulis who can put out a side to disrupt all of that!! It's not a science..
If your view point that football is a science, then so is every sport/game......maybe drinking beer is too!!

 

Sam Allardyce employs Sportstec. Mr Allardyce utilises sports science, statistical analysis and psychology ... Tony Pulis again uses scientific football data analysis - It is support to WBA set plays.

 

It's not what I describe science to be. Maybe the ball shape, having certain curves on boots or shin pads etc, But not how it's played..
To me it's dressed up young mans tactics to a simple game..

 

Sports science and its data analysis applies to how the game is played, how training is conducted, and also to how to treat and prevent injury. Even at kids - grass roots level simple quantative recording can easily be used to aid performance.

These tools can simplify further a simple game.

 

Arsenal was at the forefront with the above..............................................possibly has the worst injury record in the premiership!!
Sorry, you might, but I'm not buying into it..

 

You do realise that our players are kitted out with data analysis boxes monitoring their movement, heart rate, fitness levels etc and have been since last summer don't you?

 

Might want to direct that to another poster. It is not myself that is maintaining its nonsense.

 

What a load of mumbo jumbo, it's a game of bloody football, or it was in my day.

 

when was your day? moved on a bit from mine. most sports have.

 

I think a lot of Englands underachieving has been due to the oversized egos and lethargy of the players, who are warned by their foreign club coaches not to get injured playing for England or it might affect their day job.

I said after the South Africa debacle that we should have picked a side from the Championship who would have appreciated being given the job and would have given their all.

 

I know. I hear about zonal marking etc and don't really take a lot of notice- Not sure how you mark a zone. It was always man to man in my day. I can understand tactics. There was a guy who phoned in on 606 on the way back Saturday, moaning that Liverpool dont beat the so called lesser teams. Those teams wont beat Liverpool by going toe to tow with them, so have to employ something different.