Yallop laments lack of technique

[ted]

OK, So the BCSA bigwigs roll into town last night to sell the new BC Player Development Pyramid and they bring Carl Valentine, Sean Fleming, Bob Lenarduzzi and Frank Yallop along to bolster their case.

Anyway, Lenarduzzi talked a bit about the failure of the MNT to qualify during his time as Coach. He also gave some good natured stick to Yallop but essentially he (and later Valentine) both said there was nothing he could have done. Actually in particular Valentine said it was a failure shared all the way down the line to local coaches of youth players (himself included!) who do not stress technique.

So it was interesting a little later that Yallop (in discussing the importance of early training for ball skills) said that his team just did not have the individual skills required to qualify. He was clearly not blaming the guys but was trying to make the youth coaches and administrators in the audience see why technical skill was more important than anything else at the age groups they deal with.

Several panelists spoke out against the "winning is everything" attitude and the need for a unified development structure that builds a foundation on technique not tactics for young players.

Despite the talk of the need for harmony the bulk of the evening was spent in acrimonious debate from a faction that believes football should be run as a private enterprise at the youth level. But that is another thread.

[Cheeta]

What a load of crap.

[SeanKeay]

Technique??? oh come on Yallop... these guys play pro soccer, they have technique!!! if they didnt they wouldnt have jobs, what i feel the problem was. Is that he was picking a-leaguers.... there the ones who dont have technique!

When guys who touch the ball every day like bircham, brennan, aguiar, atiba, and other guys are not being considered.. there will be a problem

[Free kick]

I am surprised to see the reponses to the quote stating that Canada "just did not have the individual skills required to qualify".

But I feel and have felt for a long a long time that the sentiment expressed by Yallop is accurate. We defenitely have been lacking in this area for a very long time and it needs to be adressed. We could sit here and write at great lenghts why we didn't qualify for the hex and many of the reasons mentioned here are valid: preparation, refereeing, fans, player selection, CSA, etc etc. But ultimately it comes down to what you do on the pitch which is based on a talent and execution. Individual ball skills is a big part of it and I most definitely have seen very many examples in the latest qualifying round demonstating that we are very much lacking ( as we have in the past) in this area. Just check some of the goals scored against us in the last round and you will see demonstations of ball control ( either scoring or setting up the goals) that our players seldom , if ever display. Example, check out Wanchope strike in teh match in Costa Rica and take a look at the ball control display from Sunsin(sp) that led to the second Costa rican goal in Vancouver. That is why we have trouble scoring.

In most team sports, teams with great individual talent can overcome and succeed despite many other obstacles such as bad refereeing, poor preparation, fatigue, incompetitant FA etc etc.

As I said, all of the above noted reasons or excuses for our failed qualifying efforts are EQUALLY valid. Including individual skills. But this is nothing really new.

[Gian-Luca]

The problem with the view of "we didn't have the talent or technique to qualify" is that it suggests that Guatemala has a more talented pool players than we do. And I don't buy that for a minute (never mind T&T and Panama who have also made it further than we have, through no superior talent of their own).

The other problem with the view that we lacked sufficient talent to qualify is that there were plenty of players we did not select with superior technique to some of the players that were selected. In other words, if superior technique is what you want, select Tam instead of Watson.

Having said that, if it was just a ploy by Yallop to stress better individual skill being taught at all levels, then I'm fine with that. It's not like our overall skill level at every level can't be improved at all. So this aspect I can appreciate - I just think it is also letting Yallop off the hook for his decisions which cost us.

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by SeanKeay

Technique??? oh come on Yallop... these guys play pro soccer, they have technique!!! if they didnt they wouldnt have jobs, what i feel the problem was. Is that he was picking a-leaguers.... there the ones who dont have technique!

When guys who touch the ball every day like bircham, brennan, aguiar, atiba, and other guys are not being considered.. there will be a problem

True, they may play pro soccer. But there many attributes that are sought in a pro players. You could be lacking in the individual skills area but be able to make positive contributions through your fitness, atlethisism, saavy, strenght experience, leadership and character. To name a few. So yeah, Stalteri might be a better pro than Sunsin(sp). But does that necessarily mean that he is stronger technically?

If you are lacking in many of the aformentioned areas, you might never make it as pro despite having great technical abilities. No different than hockey. We all have tales, of immensely talented players that we saw as juniors or in youth hockey who never made it. But others who don't stand out as much make it all the way. Unlike international hockey, our MNT's don't have the vast pool to choose from in order to strike the right balance in all of the areas. Individual ball control, IMHO is one atttribute that gets lost and is in short supply.

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by SeanKeay

Technique??? oh come on Yallop... these guys play pro soccer, they have technique!!! if they didnt they wouldnt have jobs, what i feel the problem was. Is that he was picking a-leaguers.... there the ones who dont have technique!

When guys who touch the ball every day like bircham, brennan, aguiar, atiba, and other guys are not being considered.. there will be a problem

True, they may play pro soccer. But there many attributes that are sought in a pro players. You could be lacking in the individual skills area but be able to make positive contributions through your fitness, atlethisism, saavy, strenght experience, leadership and character. To name a few. So yeah, Stalteri might be a better pro than Sunsin(sp). But does that necessarily mean that he is stronger technically?

If you are lacking in many of the aformentioned areas, you might never make it as pro despite having great technical abilities. No different than hockey. We all have tales, of immensely talented players that we saw as juniors or in youth hockey who never made it. But others who don't stand out as much make it all the way. Unlike international hockey, our MNT's don't have the vast pool to choose from in order to strike the right balance in all of the areas. Individual ball control, IMHO is one atttribute that gets lost and is in short supply.

[BrennanFan]

yes, lack of individual skill was a factor in our elimination. Stressing it in youth programs is great. But what good will it do if the guys stressing it dont really know what to teach. Canadaian coaches just dont have the ability to teach high level technical ball skills, if they did, they would have done so already. Obviously we need outside help to make this 'stressing technique' thing make a difference.

[BrennanFan]

yes, lack of individual skill was a factor in our elimination. Stressing it in youth programs is great. But what good will it do if the guys stressing it dont really know what to teach. Canadaian coaches just dont have the ability to teach high level technical ball skills, if they did, they would have done so already. Obviously we need outside help to make this 'stressing technique' thing make a difference.

[ted]

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

The problem with the view of "we didn't have the talent or technique to qualify" is that it suggests that Guatemala has a more talented pool players than we do. And I don't buy that for a minute (never mind T&T and Panama who have also made it further than we have, through no superior talent of their own).

OK, let me be absolutely clear (and not just for you G-L). NOTHING was said about talent of individuals.

quote:

Having said that, if it was just a ploy by Yallop to stress better individual skill being taught at all levels, then I'm fine with that. It's not like our overall skill level at every level can't be improved at all. So this aspect I can appreciate - I just think it is also letting Yallop off the hook for his decisions which cost us.

This is indeed what the comments were intended to achieve. Right or wrong I think he was trying to give his honest appraisal of part of what happened so we can move forward. The entire evening was dedicated to a new approach to developing youth players to the highest standard possible with an eye on eventually providing NT players. Yallop DID NOT say that this was the only reason they failed to qualify. I am NOT saying that either. He simply was trying to show the assembled coaches and administrators how they can support the NT.

Another panelist (might have been Sean Fleming) claimed that the semi-finalists in the last World Cup were the four teams who gave away the ball the least. I would sure love to have had the chance to question where he got that from but it would not surprise me were it to be true.

[ted]

quote:Originally posted by Gian-Luca

The problem with the view of "we didn't have the talent or technique to qualify" is that it suggests that Guatemala has a more talented pool players than we do. And I don't buy that for a minute (never mind T&T and Panama who have also made it further than we have, through no superior talent of their own).

OK, let me be absolutely clear (and not just for you G-L). NOTHING was said about talent of individuals.

quote:

Having said that, if it was just a ploy by Yallop to stress better individual skill being taught at all levels, then I'm fine with that. It's not like our overall skill level at every level can't be improved at all. So this aspect I can appreciate - I just think it is also letting Yallop off the hook for his decisions which cost us.

This is indeed what the comments were intended to achieve. Right or wrong I think he was trying to give his honest appraisal of part of what happened so we can move forward. The entire evening was dedicated to a new approach to developing youth players to the highest standard possible with an eye on eventually providing NT players. Yallop DID NOT say that this was the only reason they failed to qualify. I am NOT saying that either. He simply was trying to show the assembled coaches and administrators how they can support the NT.

Another panelist (might have been Sean Fleming) claimed that the semi-finalists in the last World Cup were the four teams who gave away the ball the least. I would sure love to have had the chance to question where he got that from but it would not surprise me were it to be true.

[ted]

quote:Originally posted by BrennanFan

yes, lack of individual skill was a factor in our elimination. Stressing it in youth programs is great. But what good will it do if the guys stressing it dont really know what to teach. Canadaian coaches just dont have the ability to teach high level technical ball skills, if they did, they would have done so already. Obviously we need outside help to make this 'stressing technique' thing make a difference.

That was one of the main thrusts of this new "Pyramid". It is not just a an organizational table but it it supposed to be a support network for coaches right down to house leagues. We had coaches of the top select teams on the Lower Island and we had a dad who stepped in to coach U7's who has never played. The panelists talked about how the coaches from the higher levels could support the lower level coaches who often have no experience. They used the phrase "coaches coaching coaches to coach" a couple of times.

It could all be hot air but I see the benefit to trying.

[ted]

quote:Originally posted by BrennanFan

yes, lack of individual skill was a factor in our elimination. Stressing it in youth programs is great. But what good will it do if the guys stressing it dont really know what to teach. Canadaian coaches just dont have the ability to teach high level technical ball skills, if they did, they would have done so already. Obviously we need outside help to make this 'stressing technique' thing make a difference.

That was one of the main thrusts of this new "Pyramid". It is not just a an organizational table but it it supposed to be a support network for coaches right down to house leagues. We had coaches of the top select teams on the Lower Island and we had a dad who stepped in to coach U7's who has never played. The panelists talked about how the coaches from the higher levels could support the lower level coaches who often have no experience. They used the phrase "coaches coaching coaches to coach" a couple of times.

It could all be hot air but I see the benefit to trying.

[Grizzly]

quote:So it was interesting a little later that Yallop (in discussing the importance of early training for ball skills) said that his team just did not have the individual skills required to qualify.

I agree that Canada's skill level needs to improve. I strongly disagree that we didn't have the skill level to make it to the Hex. Certainly if a coach has penciled in players like Watson and Onstad we don't have the skill level but that is his own fault. Was he thinking about Corrazin's superior technique when he subbed him in for Hume? In fact it was at the coaching position where I think the skill level was most lacking. Given the skill level that we had in our player pool, we never had our most talented players together except for the games against Belize. Those top skilled players who he did call were not employed in an effective way. Of course we have been through this all before but Yallop keeps bringing up the subject through his commentary. Does not seem to be a great believer in taking personal responsibility. He has many excuses but I can't remember hearing him admit to one mistake. He is like the George Bush of the soccer world. I've been willing to give him a chance to see if things improve but so far his commentaries and future plans haven't given me much cause for hope. On the contrary it makes me understand better why we had such a poor qualifying campaign.

[Grizzly]

quote:So it was interesting a little later that Yallop (in discussing the importance of early training for ball skills) said that his team just did not have the individual skills required to qualify.

I agree that Canada's skill level needs to improve. I strongly disagree that we didn't have the skill level to make it to the Hex. Certainly if a coach has penciled in players like Watson and Onstad we don't have the skill level but that is his own fault. Was he thinking about Corrazin's superior technique when he subbed him in for Hume? In fact it was at the coaching position where I think the skill level was most lacking. Given the skill level that we had in our player pool, we never had our most talented players together except for the games against Belize. Those top skilled players who he did call were not employed in an effective way. Of course we have been through this all before but Yallop keeps bringing up the subject through his commentary. Does not seem to be a great believer in taking personal responsibility. He has many excuses but I can't remember hearing him admit to one mistake. He is like the George Bush of the soccer world. I've been willing to give him a chance to see if things improve but so far his commentaries and future plans haven't given me much cause for hope. On the contrary it makes me understand better why we had such a poor qualifying campaign.

[The Beaver]

A quick Canadian example of what a coach can achieve when he has the technical and tactical know-how to develop his players and team (A heart-warming tale as we head toward the holidays):

Prince George (PG), BC is NOT a town you'd expect much from in terms of soccer. It's youth season starts in May and stops in June, then commences again for 3 or 4 weeks in September. By all accounts, it is a bloodly short season. Some kids get the chance to take part in camps during the summer, and some play indoor soccer, but most kids get very little time with the ball because of the short season. Registration, of course, if very good--like many parts of the country, PG's youth soccer association registers more kids than youth hockey does.

So you'd think that a town of no more than 80,000 would have little chance of taking on its A-level counterparts in the lower mainland and Victoria, where soccer can be played year-round, and where the registration numbers are exponentially greater.

But it has happened. A few times. One team, starting when they were U17s, won the Provincial club championships two years in a row. Yes, they were an athletic and talented bunch, but their great advantage was a Mexican-born, Mexican-trained coach named Oscar. (Oscar, are you out there?) He played top quality football in Mexico, was slated for big things before he blew out his knee at a young age. He came to canada years later, and coached these lads to the Provincial championships two years in a row, beating the likes of Metro Vancouver and Victoria sides. His knowledge of the game, his technique and his ability to teach technique, made all the difference. I'd love to be able to go back and have him teach me how to coach technique. he has things to offer that I'd never have learned in nearly 20 years of playing. And he was not the only one. We had a German-born coach who had very similar success. He actually coached Nilton Terroso, who plays in Portugal now.

Anyhow, the coaches helping coaches coach is an excellent idea. It is also vital for our soccer associations to make the best use of their more talented and experienced coaches. If I was still involved in PG soccer, I'd push to have Oscar and a number of other coaches run high-level clinics throughout the year. Their knowledge is too damned valuable NOT to use fully.

Okay, I'm done. Happy Holidays.

[Nolberto S.]

Hmm...let's see what technicality and Nolberto S have in common, oh that's right, Nolberto S. has been stressing this for the last 4 years, finally Canada is waking up and discovering that maybe hoofing the ball is not the best way to score or generate scoring chances. I'm out, that's all I got to say, I'll wait and see how they go about teaching technicality, but you guys know what my answer was to this. Later.

[RS]

quote:Originally posted by Nolberto S.

Hmm...let's see what technicality and Nolberto S have in common, oh that's right, Nolberto S. has been stressing this for the last 4 years, finally Canada is waking up and discovering that maybe hoofing the ball is not the best way to score or generate scoring chances. I'm out, that's all I got to say, I'll wait and see how they go about teaching technicality, but you guys know what my answer was to this. Later.

Thanks for the indepth post. [8)]

[The Beaver]

quote:Originally posted by Nolberto S.

Hmm...let's see what technicality and Nolberto S have in common, oh that's right, Nolberto S. has been stressing this for the last 4 years, finally Canada is waking up and discovering that maybe hoofing the ball is not the best way to score or generate scoring chances. I'm out, that's all I got to say, I'll wait and see how they go about teaching technicality, but you guys know what my answer was to this. Later.

Well, I'd doubt few here would argue that our players (and therefore our teams) would benefit from improved technical skill. But in the past I recall your claiming that technique was EVERYTHING, and many here took you to task for that. Technique is vital, but it can only get you so far, much in the same way that tactics and organization can only get you so far on their own. For instance, look at our game versus Libya. We were clearly not the better team in terms of technical skill, but we still won the game by a couple of goals. This wasn't even our strongest squad.

[^]

[Beast2005]

quote:Originally posted by The Beaver

Well, I'd doubt few here would argue that our players (and therefore our teams) would benefit from improved technical skill. But in the past I recall your claiming that technique was EVERYTHING, and many here took you to task for that. Technique is vital, but it can only get you so far, much in the same way that tactics and organization can only get you so far on their own. For instance, look at our game versus Libya. We were clearly not the better team in terms of technical skill, but we still won the game by a couple of goals. This wasn't even our strongest squad.

[^]

Frank if he is still in charge next season, should IMHO go back to a defence firts style of play. We're not going to outscore many teams so lets try keeping the goals out. That would be a nice change.[^]

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by Nolberto S.

Hmm...let's see what technicality and Nolberto S have in common, oh that's right, Nolberto S. has been stressing this for the last 4 years, finally Canada is waking up and discovering that maybe hoofing the ball is not the best way to score or generate scoring chances. I'm out, that's all I got to say, I'll wait and see how they go about teaching technicality, but you guys know what my answer was to this. Later.

To be fair. We don't hoof the ball anymore. The coaches and players fully understand what is needed to win and there are a few players on this squad who play at the highest level.

It takes alot of different skills to be world class players. Proper ball control and technical abilities are one of skills but there are others that are equally important. Yes, we are a little lacking in this area in my opinion and that is why we do not score as often. But would you say that Honduras is a superior squad to canada? I don't think so. They too have deficencies that I noted in many areas of their game. it doesn't make them a beter squad than Canada.

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by The Beaver

Actually thats a perfect example to prove my point. But I take a slightly different view from you. IMO, Libya were the far superior squad in the area of ball control, creativity, and overall techical abilities. But they were still a crap team and their players appeared one dimensional.

Although, it should be noted that ( last time I checked) they were doing surprisingly well in WCQ. I have noted alot of strong individual ball skills from what I have seen of North African sides.

[Cheeta]

This is actualy a pretty good thread.

First things first. Totaly agree more technical training (ball skills) is necessary in much of what the kids learn. At the expense of tactic drills? Not so sure about that. Guess it could be better balanced. But I honestly feel so much of what kids will learn about ball control, dribbling, and touch passing isn't going to occure during practices but during everyday school yard pricking about. Of that, I'm nearly convinced. So swallowing up large amounts of tactical training for more ball skill drills would be counter productive to me.

Plant a seed, and see if it grows. Going to have to water it now and again. Add a bit of Miracle-Grow if you can get it. But in the end it's up to Mother Nature.

Good tactical training, the sort that lets you see the field, the evolution of stratagies, makes your play and positioning instantly adaptable and versatile, blah, blah, blah, isn't readily learnt outside of the organized structure of the practice field. It isn't. At least at that higher level. And is as equaly important. No? I certainly bloody well think so.

And...

Yallop, Valentine, the 'Duz. They've all got it in their heads what they would like a Canada team to look like. But I'm sorry, lads. A good manager makes an assessment of his strengths and then finds the path to utilise those strenghts. He dosen't try to make out a duck for dog and then blame the winged fellow for not fetching the stick. So sorry Old Boys. Yes there was a-fu'k-of-a-lot Yallop could have done about getting us into the Hex and beyond. And none of it has anything to do with the technical skills of teenage BC footballers.

[juaninho]

I agree with Cheeta, this is an interesting thread. But could i suggest that not all skills be taught at once, but rather phased in. I don't think skill teaching is a matter of either/or, but rather a question of 'when'. Teach the skills training first, as this is the most important when you actually have the ball. Then when the kids have a vast array of dizzying skills, then phase in tactical skills, what to do when you don't have the ball. From what i know of developmental psychology, logical or critical thinking skills are the last to develop - hell for some it never develops - and these are the mental skills needed to digest tactics and strategy. So, teaching skills that involve muscular coordination first over thought coordination makes sense. Tactical skills can begin to be taught and phased in after 11-12 or so. As well, position rotation of the kids would be beneficial when teaching tactical skills, as the kids would get a better sense of the responsibilities and opportunities each position requires.

As for Yallop not getting fleeced by Valentine and the 'Duz, maybe it is a case of the opposite of the 'tall poppy syndrome'. To those who do not rise above us, we welcome you with open arms? Yeah, i agree Cheeta, a good coach works with what he has, not with what he wants.

[Free kick]

On my way to work this morning, I got to thinking of this thread when reading an article in the Star on the three Canadian women playing for the University of Notre Dame. Thorlackson, Chapman, and Tancredi are key ingrediants of a team that will be vying for a spot in the NCAA finals for Notre dame.

When discuss the physical elements to their game they stressed that these are the skills that distinguishes them from all their piers from the US and other countries. Here is a direct quote from one of the players that speaks volumes about how the game is taught at the youth level: " All three of us have a physical nature about us that I am prety sure teams don't want to go against. I think its definitely the ( Canadian National team ) program. Americans from when they are very little are taught skills and thought to possess. Canadians are usually taught to kick the ball as hard as you can and be as physical as you can and that just carries on to college."

Well that pretty much says it all about the competence and understanding of the game amongst the youth players and coaches. There nothing to teach in regards to kicking the ball hard[V] and being physical. It just shows what youth coaches know about the game at the youth levels and how clueless some of these girls are about the modern game. How much different can it be within the boys levels. Further reason to ignore womens soccer.