Coaching in Canada - Too much, too soon?

[River City]

COACHING STRUCTURE IN CANADA (the boring introductory bit)

I took the NCCP Child Course today, which comprises one of three elements before being granted the NCCP Community Coaching Certificate. The other two elements are the Youth Course (which I'm hoping to take in the fall) and the Senior Course which I'm registered for in May. The Community Coaching Certificate is the requisite for writing the B-License Test which qualifies you for actually taking the B License, itself the requisite for the A-License.

Essentially, you show up, participate in the instruction and are then granted the certificate. There were 18 other classmates taking the course, some with no previous coaching experience, others coaching U4's all the way to U-16's. Some were there in order to complete the requisite component before moving on to the B-level, while others were there because they find themselves coaching their kid's teams and need to course to give them a foundation and some guidance as to what to do.

The structure of the course itself is fine. You start off the morning (3 hours) with a theoretical component. The role of the coach and stages of development. You then go outside and go over the practical component. Fun drills/games that U4's to U-8's can enjoy while giving them the basics of soccer - namely, movement, ball control and turning. In the afternoon (3 hours), you again start with a theoretical component - Safety/Liability and Ethics. You then go outside and do drills/games for the U-8's to the U-10's.

I personally loved the course. And the instructor was experienced, knowledgeable and insightful. And I recognize that this course is INVALUABLE to those that are coaching as volunteers their kids' teams. But with my limited experience of children's soccer (my 5 year old has played one year of outdoor and one of indoor), I'm still unsure of the benefits of organized soccer before kids reach 10 years.

STREET SOCCER (the ideal)

Growing up in Portugal, street and schoolyard soccer were the norm. Mind you that was in the early 80's, there weren't that many cars in my island (I'm from the nice islands, not the crappy one Cristiano Ronaldo is from....) and kids had more autonomy than they do now. Having said that, my parents were overprotective, so I had no street soccer opportunities. And the only thing I learned from schoolyard soccer were the dirty tricks....

More intelligent people than me (Rinus Michel) argued and argue that nothing teaches kids better than street soccer. Since this is not feasible for the majority of Canadian kids (too many cars, too much structured play time), is putting 3-5 year olds into a community team, giving them an hour of practice and one game a week, a suitable replacement? Is it even worth it? Africa and South America continuouly develop amazing talent. And it's not because their minor soccer programs are better than ours.

ORGANIZED CHILDREN'S SOCCER (the heart of the matter)

Imagine you are coaching an under 6 team. You need to deal with kids with very short attention spans, deal with overbearing parents who will criticize you no matter what you do, deal with all the fun and joy of parental meetings/phone trees/car pools and supposedly 'teach' these kids the foundations of soccer with drills/games that need to be simple, fun and most likely not involve any soccer balls as some of the kids have enough problems walking without falling down never mind run. 1 hour of practice a week. 1 game a week. And for no money.

This does not make you a coach. This makes you a glorified babysitter. And I don't mean this as a knock against those that are coaching. Their dedication, patience and work ethic are borderline masochistic.

The only ones who benefit from U-6 soccer are the community leagues/minor soccer associations (clubs as well?) who are essentially running a glorified babysitting service and not paying for the babysitters (coaches). Apparently there are stats on the amount of kids that are turned off from soccer by the time they're 13. I'd like to see the stats on the amount of dedicated coaches who are turned off from soccer as well. I don't mean turned off as in not coaching again once their kids reach 13. I mean, won't bother to watch a game ever again.

When children's teams go on tournaments and play 3 or more games in a weekend, whose interests are being served? The kids? Apparently Europeans shake their heads that we would even consider putting kids (and adults) through that kind of physical stress. The associations have their own interests at heart and it goes from the U-4's to men's soccer. Just last outdoor season, my men's league in their infinite wisdom scheduled my team for 4 games in an 8 day span and to close the season, we played two days in a row. We finished third in our div, 3 points from first place.

Back to the kids. I'm sure there are success stories. I've seen 5 year olds dribble the ball like nobody's business. But I've also 99% of the other kids as clueless as......well....3-5 year olds. And yes it is worth the effort to see the smiles on the kids faces as they collectively chase a ball. But these same kids would find the same amount of happiness listening to poop jokes or running in a park, for the sake of running in a park. U-6 soccer (I'm limiting my diatribe to what I have experience with) is seemingly the 'in' thing to do by parents who are peer pressured to put their kids into a program of some sort. At this age range, put the kids into gymnastics or painting or music. Don't put them into 'soccer' - this as a serious waste of resources, energy and focus.

SOLUTIONS

Not sure how many other V's have taken coaching courses, to which level they are certified, but your thoughts are appreciated. Are there improvements to the current system that would make the kids more appreciative for soccer, develop their talents and make the coach's role easier? Or would it be better to get rid of the whole system? Would it be better for minor soccer associations and community leagues to simply provide daily, drop-in soccer hours, where parents can drop off their kids and they can just run around to their heart's content with a soccer ball and minimal adult intervention?

Regardless, make sure you thank your kid's minor soccer coach instead of badgering him/her about how much playing time someone's snot-nosed kid had.....and maybe take a coaching course. They're fun, informative and as soccer fans, give us better insight into the stuff we complain about all the time. I'm even considering taking a Refereeing course....

[Soju]

Futsal is the way forward for Canada imo as far as recreating street football conditions for our players. Proper international futsal rules no wall-ball. It plays more like hockey (more exciting for soccer moms), can be played indoors (weather problem) and simulates street football with less time on the ball and each player getting a lot of touches and being more involved in play.

And if that doesn't work we always have Matrix Ball

[Guest Jeffery S.]

A couple things.

I have seen decent coaching and even some decent play at age 6. If a kid can receive the ball in control and then pass it to another who is more than two yards away, that is a great step for age 6. If a wing can run the wing and occasionally cross it in, that is very positive. If a defender can stay between the attacker and the goal, like a basketball defender, that is a big step too. But the most important thing at age 6, as far as coaching goes, is HAVE A BALL FOR EVERY KID PRACTICING. Now dribble down the field left foot only, now right, now back and forth, now passing it between two kids stationary, now moving, using the instep, using the outside of the foot only, stepping on it, and so on. Foot to ball skills, and no damn conditioning without a ball, they don't need it if they are normal active kids. As little waiting in a line to take a shot when your turn comes up as possible. You don't even have to teach shooting, you just teach passing, and when they can do that, let them pass the ball hard into the net.

As for street soccer:

My son has played soccer pretty well every day at school since grade one, that is four years running. They play soccer at lunch hour, or say 80% of the time. Maybe 15 kids, his age, a few older ones too. The results are only average, they can dribble, they can score because they go like nuts and attack constantly, but they do not play as a team and have a lot of defects they have to unlearn when it comes time to play competitively.

I say this as a smaller group of them play competitive school futsal, all from the same class, but what I see in the weekend competition are serious flaws. They do not move off the ball correctly, they don't pass intelligently (my son does this okay though), they have little tactical sense, they rarely understand you have to move backwards to be able to move forwards. They are very weak playing into space, part of playing in tight quarters always (Canadian defect on immense fields in public parks: play way away into space and let the fast kid catch up with the ball 30 metres downfield).

Effectively, they need coaching, and a lot of it, to take their raw "street" skills and make them useful. And with a day or two a week, which is what they get, it is not really enough. If they would practice all together twice a week that may be okay, with the same coach they have in games though, not another. But for that to happen you have to maybe do less homework, or less music, or less chess or other extracurriculars, and that probably is not going to happen with 95% of kids, only a fragment have single-minded soccer parents (I am not one).

I can honestly say that even though my kid's team is amongt the better 20% in school futsal in Barcelona, and I have seen them lose to superior teams, I have not seen a single 9 or ten year old that I would consider to be future pro material. Not one fully complete two way player, not one real star.

Final comment about competition: they like it, they find it mostly fun. If they never win it is kind of terrible, but even then, I have seen teams being beaten by a dozen goals celebrate their own occasional goal with great excitement. If you don't win it is frustrating, but eventually, some day, you will win, so that is a good lesson. If they win occasionally it helps them realize that their efforts are paying off, that the coaching does make sense. No competition is terrible for learning, in my opinion, because it does not allow kids to see the results of their practicing in the form of a winner and loser, and it denies the chance to be humbled by other kids who may be better than them.

I recall the Whitecaps soccer camp I sent my kid to in Van 4 years ago, they trained with a set group based on skills and age for a week. They were other similar groups as there were a lot of kids. But on the final day they had games, but breaking up the groups, remixing them, and letting them play that way. A disaster, no cohesion, not knowing your teammates, not knowing each other's names. Simply smart aleck coaching, applied stupidity.

If a kid is going to be in the blue group, let him stay in the blue group, live and breathe the blue group, and compete with the blue group. At that time my kid was training in Barcelona and they'd divided the entire u-6 soccer school into World Cup teams and played an internal league, Italy, Germany, England, Brazil (no Spain). Even now when my kid plays soccer computer games he chooses Germany because he remembers playing his first competitive year as Germany.

[Sam]

I've taken my first two community coaching levels which allows me to coach up to fourteen-year-olds. First off I think the course is very poorly designed, I had good instructors for both clinics, but I just don't think that one day is enough to cover what you need to know. I still play competitively and was fourteen not too long ago, so the clinics weren't all the mind opening. I'm not saying I didn't learn anything, but a lot of the drills and warm ups are things that I do at practices or have done. They were good drills and I think important ones for all Canadian coaches to learn, but not nearly enough. I think to be able to coach even at a community level, you should have at least a week of instruction.

Now this brings us into a lose-lose situation. If the CSA expanded the coaching requirements to a week or longer we'd lose coaches. I can tell you the course is not an exciting one, and staying for a week wouldn't be high on many people's priority list. With that being said the 9 hr. courses for level one and two aren't nearly enough for most people. Sitting in that room thinking that for most people this is the only exposure that any of these people will get before coaching our players is a little frightening. I mean you just don't have enough information to be a good coach after this course. I imagine that whether you are a good coach or not has less to do with what you took out of the course and more you're background in the sport.

As for your "street soccer" preposition. I think that is something that is easy to teach. At a young age kids need to be getting together on their own time and playing at downtown parks, in the school yard etc. You always hear stories of professional players who grew up with a ball at their feet. Well in Canada why don't we have players at the park everyday just playing around with a ball and some friends.

So what to actually do... I have no idea, I just think that something needs to change at this level before anything is going to change at the highest level.

[Saviola7]

^^Further to what Jeffery said, my son (just turned 5) also does organised soccer and loves it. It is really the highlight of his week. At this particular club he is only doing training (no matches), because they couldn't get enough kids to commit at the start of the season. That is fine for me since the weekends are usually quite busy for us.

But really, he loves it and is always looking forward to it. He also is excited about next year when he'll actually play matches and wear a uniform. Being on a team where everyone wears the same colour shirt is apparently really important.

So while I agree that we shouldn't pressure our kids into it and it should be promoted as a pastime, I don't think we have to remove the programs since some of the kids actually really like it.

[bettermirror]

quote:Originally posted by River City

COACHING STRUCTURE IN CANADA (the boring introductory bit)

I took the NCCP Child Course today, which comprises one of three elements before being granted the NCCP Community Coaching Certificate. The other two elements are the Youth Course (which I'm hoping to take in the fall) and the Senior Course which I'm registered for in May. The Community Coaching Certificate is the requisite for writing the B-License Test which qualifies you for actually taking the B License, itself the requisite for the A-License.

Essentially, you show up, participate in the instruction and are then granted the certificate. There were 18 other classmates taking the course, some with no previous coaching experience, others coaching U4's all the way to U-16's. Some were there in order to complete the requisite component before moving on to the B-level, while others were there because they find themselves coaching their kid's teams and need to course to give them a foundation and some guidance as to what to do.

The structure of the course itself is fine. You start off the morning (3 hours) with a theoretical component. The role of the coach and stages of development. You then go outside and go over the practical component. Fun drills/games that U4's to U-8's can enjoy while giving them the basics of soccer - namely, movement, ball control and turning. In the afternoon (3 hours), you again start with a theoretical component - Safety/Liability and Ethics. You then go outside and do drills/games for the U-8's to the U-10's.

I personally loved the course. And the instructor was experienced, knowledgeable and insightful. And I recognize that this course is INVALUABLE to those that are coaching as volunteers their kids' teams. But with my limited experience of children's soccer (my 5 year old has played one year of outdoor and one of indoor), I'm still unsure of the benefits of organized soccer before kids reach 10 years.

STREET SOCCER (the ideal)

Growing up in Portugal, street and schoolyard soccer were the norm. Mind you that was in the early 80's, there weren't that many cars in my island (I'm from the nice islands, not the crappy one Cristiano Ronaldo is from....) and kids had more autonomy than they do now. Having said that, my parents were overprotective, so I had no street soccer opportunities. And the only thing I learned from schoolyard soccer were the dirty tricks....

More intelligent people than me (Rinus Michel) argued and argue that nothing teaches kids better than street soccer. Since this is not feasible for the majority of Canadian kids (too many cars, too much structured play time), is putting 3-5 year olds into a community team, giving them an hour of practice and one game a week, a suitable replacement? Is it even worth it? Africa and South America continuouly develop amazing talent. And it's not because their minor soccer programs are better than ours.

ORGANIZED CHILDREN'S SOCCER (the heart of the matter)

Imagine you are coaching an under 6 team. You need to deal with kids with very short attention spans, deal with overbearing parents who will criticize you no matter what you do, deal with all the fun and joy of parental meetings/phone trees/car pools and supposedly 'teach' these kids the foundations of soccer with drills/games that need to be simple, fun and most likely not involve any soccer balls as some of the kids have enough problems walking without falling down never mind run. 1 hour of practice a week. 1 game a week. And for no money.

This does not make you a coach. This makes you a glorified babysitter. And I don't mean this as a knock against those that are coaching. Their dedication, patience and work ethic are borderline masochistic.

The only ones who benefit from U-6 soccer are the community leagues/minor soccer associations (clubs as well?) who are essentially running a glorified babysitting service and not paying for the babysitters (coaches). Apparently there are stats on the amount of kids that are turned off from soccer by the time they're 13. I'd like to see the stats on the amount of dedicated coaches who are turned off from soccer as well. I don't mean turned off as in not coaching again once their kids reach 13. I mean, won't bother to watch a game ever again.

When children's teams go on tournaments and play 3 or more games in a weekend, whose interests are being served? The kids? Apparently Europeans shake their heads that we would even consider putting kids (and adults) through that kind of physical stress. The associations have their own interests at heart and it goes from the U-4's to men's soccer. Just last outdoor season, my men's league in their infinite wisdom scheduled my team for 4 games in an 8 day span and to close the season, we played two days in a row. We finished third in our div, 3 points from first place.

Back to the kids. I'm sure there are success stories. I've seen 5 year olds dribble the ball like nobody's business. But I've also 99% of the other kids as clueless as......well....3-5 year olds. And yes it is worth the effort to see the smiles on the kids faces as they collectively chase a ball. But these same kids would find the same amount of happiness listening to poop jokes or running in a park, for the sake of running in a park. U-6 soccer (I'm limiting my diatribe to what I have experience with) is seemingly the 'in' thing to do by parents who are peer pressured to put their kids into a program of some sort. At this age range, put the kids into gymnastics or painting or music. Don't put them into 'soccer' - this as a serious waste of resources, energy and focus.

SOLUTIONS

Not sure how many other V's have taken coaching courses, to which level they are certified, but your thoughts are appreciated. Are there improvements to the current system that would make the kids more appreciative for soccer, develop their talents and make the coach's role easier? Or would it be better to get rid of the whole system? Would it be better for minor soccer associations and community leagues to simply provide daily, drop-in soccer hours, where parents can drop off their kids and they can just run around to their heart's content with a soccer ball and minimal adult intervention?

Regardless, make sure you thank your kid's minor soccer coach instead of badgering him/her about how much playing time someone's snot-nosed kid had.....and maybe take a coaching course. They're fun, informative and as soccer fans, give us better insight into the stuff we complain about all the time. I'm even considering taking a Refereeing course....

-Be careful, that's mutinous talk! The benefit is that the kids are actually playing. The parents and kids in this country are so apathetic they wouldn't play if it wasn't organized for them - or have an organization to complain to! They would just go play another sport that is organized.

-What is hopefully happening in that 1 hour a week that is beneficial for the 3-5 year old is that they develop a true love for the game. Is it enough for them technically speaking?? I'd hope they like it enough to play a street soccer game with their siblings, parents, day-care friends.

....what needs to happen is that the sessions increase in frequency every year the kids get older so that when they are 13 and require 4 days a week minimum to truly develop and compete it isn't like pulling teeth such that kids quite rather than committing that much.

-My club has an annual tournament. It looks as though I will be away for it thus my team won't play, I am happy to say. If I was here though, the kids and parents themselves would pressure me into it. These tournaments are ridiculous - our own club Head Coach agrees!

-Solutions: Turn Canada into a 3rd world country so people actually appreciate when something goes well, and work hard to make them go well .... would teach association/club loyalty too.

[bettermirror]

ps-I have the B Level.

The solution is developing coaches!!!!!!!! We can put all the programs we want in place, but the kids won't learn without coaches. I have the B Level, and have participated in exactly 3 BCSCA courses. The rest is self-taught and based on playing experience. I did attend the first BC soccer Conference - which was excellent. Roy Hodgson was there (but you could tell he had no clue how to coach youth kids...besides the point).

BCSA (and all the other associations) should be offering AT LEAST bi-monthly coaching clinics to each coaching level in the various regions. They give you the tests, expect you to pass completely of your own accord and research. I am fortunate enough to have a club head coach to guide me, but others don't. I've basically stopped attending the coaching courses for now because I get equal (or sometimes much greater) benefit from the club head coach and who teaches me theory and practical for free, outside of my own time commitment.

The provinces can't have bi-monthly sessions though - they need to pay the CSA for the delegates trips to world cups etc, and for their own secretarial staff!

[masster]

I took the youth course in BC. First off, registering for the course was a pain. I'm not affiliated with any club. I don't have any children. I just wanted to learn how to coach. When I called the BCSA, they couldn't believe this!! I wanted to register for certian courses but they were limited to coaches from certain clubs only. I had to go beg one of the instructors to let me in. Can you imagine this?? Do we have enough qualified coaches that we can afford to make it a hassle for those that are legitamitely interested?

Anyways, looking at the other 30-40 people in my class, in became quickly understandable why we are in the predicament that we are in. Half of them couldn't even pass a ball...at all!! These are the people that are coaching our children? Our instructor would run us through some simple drills and a few of the "coaches" would have trouble with these basic concepts. I talked to some of the other participants: they never go to Whitecaps games, they don't watch the sport on TV, they no nothing about it.

In the end, I couldn't believe they gave me a certificate for what amounted to 5 nights of running around and a couple of hours in a classroom where we talked about how not to be sued!!

[Guest Jeffery S.]

quote:Originally posted by masster

I took the youth course in BC. First off, registering for the course was a pain. I'm not affiliated with any club. I don't have any children. I just wanted to learn how to coach. When I called the BCSA, they couldn't believe this!! I wanted to register for certian courses but they were limited to coaches from certain clubs only. I had to go beg one of the instructors to let me in. Can you imagine this?? Do we have enough qualified coaches that we can afford to make it a hassle for those that are legitamitely interested?

Anyways, looking at the other 30-40 people in my class, in became quickly understandable why we are in the predicament that we are in. Half of them couldn't even pass a ball...at all!! These are the people that are coaching our children? Our instructor would run us through some simple drills and a few of the "coaches" would have trouble with these basic concepts. I talked to some of the other participants: they never go to Whitecaps games, they don't watch the sport on TV, they no nothing about it.

In the end, I couldn't believe they gave me a certificate for what amounted to 5 nights of running around and a couple of hours in a classroom where we talked about how not to be sued!!

Are you sure it wasn't a "general manager for youth sports clubs" course?

If you can't show the kids what to do you should not be coaching. That there is this demand though, that klutzy parents are taking courses, just shows how much fun you could have if you know how to do it, more or less, and some club lets you have a go.

[Guest Ed]

Very nice to bitch and moan about the quality of parent coaches but the bottom line is that if they didn't step up the kids would have no coach at all and teams would fold. At least they are trying to improve. It's getting better all the time. I took my first level coaching course about 15 years ago and I can see some improvement overall in level of coaching around the leagues I coach in.

[shaku_bert]

I'm co-coaching my son's 8 year old team again and I had hoped to get to a clinic but work got busy, yayda yada yada. The guy I'm coaching with is a long time coach of many age groups but had never done any courses. He attended a clinic a month ago and was also shocked at the complete lack of knowledge / experience / ability of most attendees. But, like Ed says, at least they're trying to get up to speed.

The other coach and I, as well as a bunch of kids on our team from last year jumped community clubs because our home club didn't want to participate in FCNW's (regional assoc) 8 year old program. My home club figured that 8 year olds should not be playing competitively (no ref's are involved, coaches will agree b4 games on whether it's 3 on 3 or 5 on five, no set field sizes, no rules for the kids, etc). I think it should still be about the fun at age 8 but you needn't sell kids short. I coached hockey this year in 7/8 house and the kids learned rules and developed skills.

At the 7 year old teams' and 8 years teams' coaches meeting with the convener at the new club, I asked what club's philosophy was in terms of practicing (i.e. we'll just talk to the parents and see how often they wanted to practice). Room-wide guffaws ensued wondering why we'd practice with 7's or 8's. I thought that was weird as we practiced with 7's about once a week last year and had nearly perfect attendance.

[Guest Ed]

In my association, the young ones don't keep score (har, try that one with kids) and play 3 vs 3 under 6, 4 vs 4 under 8 and (these numbers include 'goalkeepers'). These numbers are strictly enforced and most teams designate a goalkeeper but I never do, as I prefer all players to be outfield players. 'Game days' are half or more practice, followed by a short game. Few teams have practice only sessions.

[ag futbol]

You know what, there are a lot of big expectations of the people who coach soccer in this country to me we can break down the situation into several categories and go from there:

They guy coaching young kids or non-competitive teams - leave them be! Look if there's anything i learned from coaching kids that are young it's that 90% of what you say will be wasted. So stick to a handful of basics (very important you get these right however)and let them play. Any coach is capible of teaching these, just make them abundantly clear!

Competitive coaches (in older age groups): gotta be licesed, no ifs ands or buts. CSA training has to be better and more easily available. No team without a licensed competitive coach should be allowed to register on a competitve level. TD should check regularly to make sure things are pointed in the right direction.

Technical directors: need to play a more active rolls in more clubs. Extra training should be required, so should a TD for any club.

From my experience: coaches jump around and concentrate on too many things at early levels (maybe even all levels). I've coached (and helped coach) various teams ranging from ages 9-15. These kids should be trained to death to develop first touch, skiill on the ball, short passing, and foot speed. All using very simple drills! Unfortunately, these too often get over looked.

I would 100% vouch for the small game as well. There's nowhere to hide out there and it forces you to get really good at controlling the ball and seeing the game.

[River City]

Excellent points and lively discussion gents.

I'll address Saviola7/bettermirror's points by saying I didn't mean to suggest getting rid of the system and not replacing it with something else. The whole drop-in idea was essentially taking the current system and removing the coaches, allowing the kids to play on their own. Organized street soccer as it were. For the U-6 crowd. This would I think remove a big demand for coaches who for the most part will be the type that masster encountered -well meaning but short on skills/experience.

I disagree with leafdolfan in that the courses DO teach what you need to know to coach......in the current system. In part because in the current system, coaching skill development is only a small part of the role of the coach. A part which is usually addressed with a few simple drills and voila. Good enough.

Jeffrey - the one thing the instructor coach said is that positioning and passing skills aren't needed until the kids are closer to 8. I tend to agree. Partly because 4 or 5 year olds don't really have the strength to make a proper pass. His recommendation was significant touches on the ball with a focus of developing ball related skills. Creating ball hogs in his view is a good thing. Some of the drills he made a point to demonstrate, were 1v1 situations so the kids could get comfortable with that aspect as well as close contact with other players. The idea being that the kids will have plenty of time to learn how to play positional and with team mates when they're older.

At 12, they can easily learn how to play their positions, how to play off the ball, how to support team mates. It's not so easy for them how to control a ball, how to beat someone 1 on 1, or how to think in a splitsecond.

What you and ag_futbol note should be a part of proper skill development might be common sense for someone who has actually played soccer, but it is beyond the grasp of most (I'm generalizing) coaches in the system. As Masster says, most of the fellow coaches in his course had limited playing experience and I would bet couldn't name more than 5 current internationals. Masster's experience is the same as mine.

Unfortunately, at the U-6 level, what happens is the kids are herded around, put into lines to kick one ball and then wait some more. The reason I call it glorified babysitting.

BTW, Ed good job on wasting a player in net. Goalkkepers should have adequate outfield skillks to be able to support their teammates.

[JoeSoccerFan]

I could write a long dissertation (rant) on the topic, but since I want to go to bed I will give a few thoughts:

I mainly support your points. I played all my life in Canada and dabbled with some coaching when I was younger before taking on my 5-year old's team last year. I loved working with the kids but couldn't stand having to deal with 10-12 kids and almost no help from the other parents. At this age a 1:5 coach to player ratio would be best. Groups of 6 for each coach would work out much better for the kids and for the coach's sanity.

My big issue was with the club forcing organized games with too much structure. Referees, keeping score, standings all were for the overly competitive parents. My poor girl counted how many times she touched the ball each game, at an age where she just wants to have fun with the ball. Did I mention that I was repeatedly told coaches could not enter the field of play and that we could only make subs on throw ins?

My last complaint is that we ended the season off with a tournament!!! 5 year olds playing up to three matches in a single day, it was borderline child cruelty - thank god we didn't make it to the final. At one point I thought I was going to get carded by the ref for going over half on the sideline (seriously).

The solution to all of this is more qualified coaches who know how to work with the kids in the right way at the right age. For untrained volunteers, it is easier to coach a game than a practice. Unfortunately, with our sky high participation rates it is quite difficult to have the right coach to player ratios.

Just my two cents.

[Guest Jeffery S.]

quote:Originally posted by River City

Excellent points and lively discussion gents.

Jeffrey - the one thing the instructor coach said is that positioning and passing skills aren't needed until the kids are closer to 8. I tend to agree. Partly because 4 or 5 year olds don't really have the strength to make a proper pass. His recommendation was significant touches on the ball with a focus of developing ball related skills. Creating ball hogs in his view is a good thing. Some of the drills he made a point to demonstrate, were 1v1 situations so the kids could get comfortable with that aspect as well as close contact with other players. The idea being that the kids will have plenty of time to learn how to play positional and with team mates when they're older.

At 12, they can easily learn how to play their positions, how to play off the ball, how to support team mates. It's not so easy for them how to control a ball, how to beat someone 1 on 1, or how to think in a splitsecond.

Well it is clear you are never going to convince anyone in Spain that passing is something not to be taught from day one. It is like going out and playing ball with your kid without throwing it to each other, it is nonsensical. I mean, you are going out to play with your 4-8 year old with a ball. What do you do with it? Not pass it? Keep it? HOg it? Kick it elsewhere? It does not make any sense. It is in fact a more logical thing to do with a ball than anything else, back and forth.

As for strength: well that is simply not correct, if they can run they can pass, if they can kick their older brother they can pass. When does that start, say age 3? But let's say all basic foot skills from 5 or 6 on should be taught, no excuses.

My son is a bit like a dog. I come home, he is lounging, I settle in, he comes up to me, about 2-3 yards away with a ball in his hand, and rolls it over, slowly, like how dogs lay a stick at your feet. And you go from there.

Keepers and Ed's comment. If a kid really wants to play keeper, great let him. Teach the two or three things you need to know and go fro there. But often kids love the catching and flashy rolling around, so even then it is okay to rotate keepers. My kid's fairly competitive futsal team has no regular keeper, they all play, which makes their results even more impressive.

If you play without a keeper you make a no shots from more than X metres out rule, and a no hands defending shots rule, and there you go.

As for those playing and not touching the ball: futsal everyone. 4 (or 5 or even 6 when younger) field players on a basketball size court. Rain or shine, any basic running shoe. No damn boards, this is not hockey. Every player in futsal, good or poor, touches the ball and is into the action.

[Guest Ed]

Just to clarify a couple of points.

On the U6 and U8 teams, we limit rosters to 6 or 8 players respectively, so that during game play, you never sit out more than one shift.

Also, the nets are downsized big time (about NHL size for uU8 and under) so that playing with or without a keeper doesn't make much of a difference. I have my 'keeper' play with his/her feet and allow them to pick up the ball in the area when under pressure and of course take goal kicks.

Regarding passing and comments on that, I might disagree with Jeffrey. Of course you have passing in drills and such, so the skill is taught. But I do not over stress passing at the U6 U8 levels. I have seen other coaches discourage their players from taking the ball on their own and yelling at them constantly to look for the pass. At U8 and below, I encourage two things primarily: ball pursuit when without the ball and ball possession with intent to score with the ball. The passing evolves from that quite easily as the kids move up in age groups.

BTW, everything changes at U10 and again at U14 in terms of field sizes, players on field etc.

And, I NEVER put my kids in the mini tournaments that are offered. Anybody who thinks a 5, 6 or 7 year old wants to play 4 or 5 games over two days needs a reality check or a tune up.

Only the season ending weekend when we typically play 2 or 3 games on the last day and do the medal presentation, photos etc.

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by masster

Anyways, looking at the other 30-40 people in my class, in became quickly understandable why we are in the predicament that we are in. Half of them couldn't even pass a ball...at all!! These are the people that are coaching our children? Our instructor would run us through some simple drills and a few of the "coaches" would have trouble with these basic concepts. I talked to some of the other participants: they never go to Whitecaps games, they don't watch the sport on TV, they no nothing about it.

Yes, that is exactly what i have noted. In one instance, I offerred up my TFC season ticket for one game to one person in know who happens to be a coach at those levels. But he ( who happens to be a huge hockey fan) was not remotely interested in watching soccer. He has alluded to the fact that he finds the sport boring. Would the same happen if we were talking to a youth hockey coach and it was NHL tickets that I offerred up? I know of some youth hockey and baseball coaches as well and I can assure you that its not the same at all.

Firstly of all let me preface that I have no first hand experience or involvement in coaching or adminstration at the micro level of the game.

But to get back to the to the original point. I have known personally some who are involved in volunteer coaching at those ages. And its through that prism that I have that formed my views on the way the game is organized in Canada and on its culture. And by extension, why there is so much areas to find fault with than just the national soccers bodies. In another example that I know of the person did not know the number of players on each side that are on a field for a soccer game. this of what this means down the road for the players that we end up developing as professional?

Like you said, I noted an extreme gap in the understanding the nuances of the game amongst these examples. Such as , basic understanding of what skills are needed to excel in the game and how those skills affect the outcome of games and development of the player. As long as you have a volunteer system oustide of a professional structure, this is what you are going to get. The pro game marketed on a broad scale goes a very long way towards developing a culture.

[red card]

quote:Yes, that is exactly what i have noted. In one instance, I offerred up my TFC season ticket to one person in know who happens to be a coach at those levels. But he ( who happens to be a huge hockey fan) was not remotely interested in watching soccer. He has alluded to the fact that he finds the sport boring. Would the same happen if we were talking to a youth hockey coach and it was NHL tickets that I offerred up? I know of some youth hockey and baseball coaches as well and I can assure you that its not the same at all.

Same story with a guy at my work who coaches his daughter's team (10 yr old). He thinks soccer is just good for kids while everything else about it is boring. He never watches soccer (including World Cup) and largely puts down the sport at any opportunity.

[Eric]

That's the real problem with the sport in our country, we have the wrong people coaching it and specially we have the wrong people running it.

[Guest Ed]

quote:Originally posted by Eric

That's the real problem with the sport in our country, we have the wrong people coaching it and specially we have the wrong people running it.

Again, please slow down with the rhetoric. You are really saying we need paid professional coaches for U6 soccer. Anybody else is part of the 'wrong people coaching it' crowd. Kids want to play soccer; in my community it is a struggle EVERY year to get enough coaches (qualified or not) to meet the demand (at U6 it is one coach for every 6 players). I have coached 2 teams for the last 6 seasons. I say embrace them all and offer coach the coach sessions, which is standard fare with my Calgary association.

[gator]

This is a subject that is close to my heart and I could write a book about youth soccer, player, coach and referee development, but I'll keep it as brief as I can! I have coached from u8 tp u18 rep teams as well as senior High School teams, I have a level 3 certificate(the old system) and have refereed and administrated clubs! First of all at the young ages that many of you talk about, this is very young,(u6)at this age you must make it fun and keep it interesting! You can't possibly teach skills if they are uninterested, or not enjoying it, look at it as a social event as well as an activity! As the kids start getting a little older some will unfortunately drop out, some will develop a love for the game! I have found many of the kids who start to develop at these early ages are playing with family and friends as well as with the organized teams you coach! Jeffrey metions about a ball for every child, I couldn't agree more, many touches of the ball are so important, so is playing mini soccer at the younger ages for the exact same reason! It was an uphill battle to get Stoney Creek Soccer Club to play smaller sided games for the younger age groups, but eventually they came round and I believe the program is much better for it! Once kids are playing u10 or u11 rep soccer it is quite competetive and they are playing on full fields, the coaches must be well trained at this point! leafdolfan mentions about more instruction for beginner coaches, but as pointed out, not many would commit to a week long course! My level 3 was that long and I had to travel to the other end of the province to get it! Ed mentions about the coaching improving and I tend to agree, even if the newbies are just taking a one day or weekend course at least they are interested and gaining some soccer knowledge, we need these people, that's how many start out! The clubs should also be promoting training courses for referees, this can only help, I've seen some pretty good ones come up through my old club! Finally we must recognize what potential these young players have, too many parents put too high of expectations on their kids in all sports, this can cause kids to drop out of sports they may love, not every kid is going to be the next Owen Har.... ok, bad example! The truly elite players will usually be found in a proper club set up! Sorry if this is a little long winded, I'm very interested in this topic though!

[Free kick]

quote:Originally posted by Ed

Again, please slow down with the rhetoric.

I agree with that as well. To simply dismiss these types on the basis of their lack of passion for the game, is an overeaction. The people I was alluding to, do bring other important skills to the table. Notably interpersonal skills (dealing with kids at that age) that are also equally imporant in other aspects or the games.

[masster]

People who are not passionate about the game should not coach the game. This should be the case with ALL sports, not just soccer. In Canada though, this rule is broken in soccer more than any other sport. That is the point I am trying to make.

[Guest Ed]

And the point I am trying to make (based on real life experience) is that there are more kids wanting to play soccer than there are parents / whatever 'with a passion for the game'. So you and Eric are quite clearly saying that those kids should be turned away for the sake of a principle. I don't agree.