No. 1--North American Soccer--How Soccer Has Evolved

Has the level of soccer improved since the mid-seventies? I have seen the progression of soccer from its infancy in both the US and Canada to its present form at the youth and professional level for over thirty years. And it seems that the progression has not been great. I was highly involved in just about every aspect of this sport in North America, especially in the US and Canada. My involvement included playing, coaching, managing, organizing and refereeing. From the very beginning I could see the difference between skillful soccer playing, and unskillful playing--often known as kickball. I love to watch international professional play at the highest level of the game but always turn away from sloppy play that often occurs at all levels of this sport. My main interest is promoting skillful play with youth soccer. So I ask this question: Why have we not made greater strides with our youth in skillful play? Here is why I feel that the progression toward more skillful play has been slow:

1. In North America, the general public does not recognize skillful play in soccer. That also includes most players coming up through the system.

2. North America likes North-American football; myself included. I have played it as a youth on organized teams and was trained by some exceptional coaches that taught the basics and insisted upon their use (both of my teams were championship teams as a result of superior coaching). But, I became deeply involved with soccer when my children were young because I believed and still believe that it is the safer alternative. And as a result, I promoted basic soccer skills in this sport just as learned in football with good results. Football requires a different mindset from soccer. To the inexperienced, they may seem similar, but they are really fundamentally different. Football is a game where much brute force is used to win. And many of its players hardly ever touch the ball, but use their force to prevent or gain yardage. This style of play is frequently seen translated into youth soccer at the competitive levels in place of using basic skills to gain the advantage over the competition. This power-style play is effective against weaker teams, but is ineffective at higher levels. Thus the players who are trained this way soon find themselves sitting on the bench during high school and college games.

3. In soccer, many North Americans believe that gaining yardage down field is an objective. Of course it is not an objective as the ball can be transferred from one end of the field to the next in seconds with no benefit to either team. Soccer is a game, or should be a game of ball control and possession, because the continuity of ball possession by a skillful team over its opponents results in a win, at least most of the time.

4. Dozens of skills are needed in soccer. Unfortunately, the average individual lacks this understanding and the average coach promotes only offensive moves. Good coaching includes proper defensive moves and tactics as well as offense. An appreciation for these skills usually comes from having had the benefit of good coaching by those that truly understand the game or by having learned them through some other means.

Does all of the above matter? It matters to me and probably to many of the professional coaches that want winning teams when competing at the highest levels.

So, the reader may ask, just where is this sport in North America going? I believe it is first necessary to understand the negatives about this sport. Without an understanding of what is incorrectly taught starting at the young age levels, it will be hard to imagine how improvements will be made and thus stagnation will be the result.

I know that improvements can be made in soccer as I have trained and coached players of all ages and have coached championship teams. Improvements always came over a few years to my teams following the development of skillful players. With some players, their improvements in skill levels were permanent, while with others, only temporary. Why? The permanent skills that certain players developed were sustained because I had total control of these same players for years and consistently corrected their errors. The improvements with many other players were only temporary because these same players went on to play under coaches that lacked the understanding of the necessity of insisting upon basic playing skills.

Many coaches might challenge what has been said and what will be said because they have coached for many years and feel that this experience yields a complete understanding of the skills and training needed. My question to them would be, “Would you compare your knowledge to the best European and South American coaches?” While I would not put myself at their level, I can certainly recognize the skill levels of their players. Furthermore, inexperienced or unknowledgeable coaches frequently negate the use of basic skills during games and thus add confusion to players. These same players (just discussed) had little future in this sport because these coaches lacked some or all the following. They

1. did not understand the absolute necessary soccer fundamentals (to be discussed in detail the future)

2. encouraged useless techniques that have no direct or indirect application in game play (to be discussed in detail in the future)

3. changed formations during a losing match; formations that were not practiced

4. were dishonest and made promises to players that were not kept

5. allowed more playing time to less skillful players that they favored.

Here are my opinions, specifically and generally, about some unproductive coaching techniques:

1. Some coaches attempt to warm up a goalkeeper by throwing the ball to this player while he or she is sitting on the ground. This goalkeeper must then catch the ball, jump up and throw it back to the thrower. What is the purpose of this exercise?

2. Not training the goalkeeper to be the defense captain.

3. Insisting upon the use of the so-called one-touch or two-touch soccer. Naturally there are times during a game where this tactic is appropriate, but it must not be the rule. There is no substitute for trapping and controlling techniques most of the time.

4. Telling players to make throw-ins “up the side line”. Throwing the ball up the sideline usually results in the ball being intercepted because that is where the defenders will be standing. It is even worse yet to allow players to take a running start. This is totally unproductive. The running start is useless, as anyone that has some knowledge of physics knows that running and then stopping before the throw, imparts a zero extra velocity onto the ball. Running to make a throw-in usually produces an invalid throw-in anyway. These practices are generally not done in top professional soccer.

5. Allowing defensive players to “attack” the ball being controlled by an attacking player. This is probably one of the least understood aspects of defense. It is frequently the cause of a lost match and can be seen at all playing levels of soccer.

6. The bureaucracy that has now permeated into many youth organizations would account for the reason that many skillful coaches have been replaced with inexperienced coaches that may have even “earned” coaching certificates. An inexperienced head coach often overrides an experienced assistant coach simply because he or she is in charge.

As stated, these are some of the many negatives that unknowledgeable coaches impart to their young players. Skills do not come easy, so in their promotion, skillful play must first be understood and accepted by the coaches. This is a necessary prerequisite before they can unceasingly insist upon what players must do or avoid doing.

Other articles will be forthcoming and often focus on the positive aspect of skillful tactics. Also, there will be some useful soccer training articles attached to my web site in the near future.