Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the biggest differences I’ve noticed is that here square or backwards passes are looked at as a dirty thing. A lot of people can’t wrap their heads around the fact that sometimes that’s simply where the space is, where your free man is, or the best way to make an opponent come out of their shell to then penetrate. A lot of backs and keepers who are supposed to be developing become no better than punters.

This is certainly the trope of a couple of posters on this forum, but it isn't fact. There are many local clubs who teach players to play back to the keeper or a defender when it's the best option.

Appreciate your anecdote, as our team plays using those principles. But I’m not naive enough to think that it’s the norm. Some/many clubs/teams is not the majority, and anyone that believes that is turning a blind eye.

I have seen that exact play, appropriate pass midfielder to defender and/or defender to keeper, in almost all older kid games I have watched, from many varied clubs over the years. If you aren't seeing it, I'm not sure what you're focused on.

I've seen passing back a fair amount, as you mentioned, but the play forward is often a big boot from the goalie or backline. Teams know how to pass back tp maintain possession. What they don't know how to do is make that forward movement and break lines while maintaining possession. The main way they break lines is booting the ball forward and then have the forwards try to win possession.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the biggest differences I’ve noticed is that here square or backwards passes are looked at as a dirty thing. A lot of people can’t wrap their heads around the fact that sometimes that’s simply where the space is, where your free man is, or the best way to make an opponent come out of their shell to then penetrate. A lot of backs and keepers who are supposed to be developing become no better than punters.

This is certainly the trope of a couple of posters on this forum, but it isn't fact. There are many local clubs who teach players to play back to the keeper or a defender when it's the best option.

Appreciate your anecdote, as our team plays using those principles. But I’m not naive enough to think that it’s the norm. Some/many clubs/teams is not the majority, and anyone that believes that is turning a blind eye.

I have seen that exact play, appropriate pass midfielder to defender and/or defender to keeper, in almost all older kid games I have watched, from many varied clubs over the years. If you aren't seeing it, I'm not sure what you're focused on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the biggest differences I’ve noticed is that here square or backwards passes are looked at as a dirty thing. A lot of people can’t wrap their heads around the fact that sometimes that’s simply where the space is, where your free man is, or the best way to make an opponent come out of their shell to then penetrate. A lot of backs and keepers who are supposed to be developing become no better than punters.

This is certainly the trope of a couple of posters on this forum, but it isn't fact. There are many local clubs who teach players to play back to the keeper or a defender when it's the best option.

Appreciate your anecdote, as our team plays using those principles. But I’m not naive enough to think that it’s the norm. Some/many clubs/teams is not the majority, and anyone that believes that is turning a blind eye.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t it the norm for some/most teams to do “Kick and Run”?

Not much dribbling or passing unless you consider kicking the ball hard up the field “passing”.

Yes, lots of teams, even "high level" teams send long balls to the front for the forwards to track down.

This is part of the arsenal of a well-balanced team. One that can possess, and when the time is right, one that can send long probing balls to a target forward or wings to open up the field. Variety oftentimes pays off.

Yes, well American teams have that part of the arsenal down pat. It's the other part of the arsenal of a well-balanced team, though, being able to maintain possession and play through pressure, that we struggle with. A good team will invite high pressure, because that opens up space between the lines so they can play through it. The only way to counteract that defensively is to maintain a compact shape when you press, which means keeping a high line, which then opens up space in behind. That's when you go long.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the biggest differences I’ve noticed is that here square or backwards passes are looked at as a dirty thing. A lot of people can’t wrap their heads around the fact that sometimes that’s simply where the space is, where your free man is, or the best way to make an opponent come out of their shell to then penetrate. A lot of backs and keepers who are supposed to be developing become no better than punters.

This is certainly the trope of a couple of posters on this forum, but it isn't fact. There are many local clubs who teach players to play back to the keeper or a defender when it's the best option.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t it the norm for some/most teams to do “Kick and Run”?

Not much dribbling or passing unless you consider kicking the ball hard up the field “passing”.

Yes, lots of teams, even "high level" teams send long balls to the front for the forwards to track down.

This is part of the arsenal of a well-balanced team. One that can possess, and when the time is right, one that can send long probing balls to a target forward or wings to open up the field. Variety oftentimes pays off.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t it the norm for some/most teams to do “Kick and Run”?

Not much dribbling or passing unless you consider kicking the ball hard up the field “passing”.

Yes, lots of teams, even "high level" teams send long balls to the front for the forwards to track down.

Anonymous wrote:Isn’t it the norm for some/most teams to do “Kick and Run”?

Not much dribbling or passing unless you consider kicking the ball hard up the field “passing”.

Anonymous wrote:One of the biggest differences I’ve noticed is that here square or backwards passes are looked at as a dirty thing. A lot of people can’t wrap their heads around the fact that sometimes that’s simply where the space is, where your free man is, or the best way to make an opponent come out of their shell to then penetrate. A lot of backs and keepers who are supposed to be developing become no better than punters.

Anonymous wrote:One of the biggest differences I’ve noticed is that here square or backwards passes are looked at as a dirty thing. A lot of people can’t wrap their heads around the fact that sometimes that’s simply where the space is, where your free man is, or the best way to make an opponent come out of their shell to then penetrate. A lot of backs and keepers who are supposed to be developing become no better than punters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bigger problem is the insistence that the tactical can only be taught at U12 and older when in fact a strong tactical understanding and process can be introduced much younger, albeit in subtle ways.

Our problem as a nation isn’t a lack of athletic and skilled players, our problem is our players lack the game IQ of other nations. We are good at doing things but we lack a conscience or sub-conscience understanding of why we are doing the things we do.

Our kids are taught, very young, to play a very straight ahead and take it yourself kind of game. When for four years that is what has been cheered by Mom and Dad, the idea of passing, assists, off the ball movement are not going to be implemented. We don’t value play without the ball enough to pass on those virtues that are the ultimate foundation of true team play. We simply try and reprogram very individual players.

Look at players in a U10/11 tryout setting. The kids who dribble, dribble, dribble get picked and the kid who makes the smart pass that keeps the ball for their team never sees the ball again and doesn’t get picked.

For everyone of you who says this is the problem, there is another person who will say that American children rely too much on passing the ball and don't develop the individual one on one skills to develop successful teams...

LOL said nobody ever.

There are actually a lot of people who say the problem is too much passing at tactics and young ages and the youngest kids need to just dribble dribble dribble until they have control of the ball and then you can work on passing.

I’m sure a lack of tactics or purposeful play but no US team can ever be guilty of passing to much.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bigger problem is the insistence that the tactical can only be taught at U12 and older when in fact a strong tactical understanding and process can be introduced much younger, albeit in subtle ways.

Our problem as a nation isn’t a lack of athletic and skilled players, our problem is our players lack the game IQ of other nations. We are good at doing things but we lack a conscience or sub-conscience understanding of why we are doing the things we do.

Our kids are taught, very young, to play a very straight ahead and take it yourself kind of game. When for four years that is what has been cheered by Mom and Dad, the idea of passing, assists, off the ball movement are not going to be implemented. We don’t value play without the ball enough to pass on those virtues that are the ultimate foundation of true team play. We simply try and reprogram very individual players.

Look at players in a U10/11 tryout setting. The kids who dribble, dribble, dribble get picked and the kid who makes the smart pass that keeps the ball for their team never sees the ball again and doesn’t get picked.

For everyone of you who says this is the problem, there is another person who will say that American children rely too much on passing the ball and don't develop the individual one on one skills to develop successful teams...

LOL said nobody ever.

There are actually a lot of people who say the problem is too much passing at tactics and young ages and the youngest kids need to just dribble dribble dribble until they have control of the ball and then you can work on passing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bigger problem is the insistence that the tactical can only be taught at U12 and older when in fact a strong tactical understanding and process can be introduced much younger, albeit in subtle ways.

Our problem as a nation isn’t a lack of athletic and skilled players, our problem is our players lack the game IQ of other nations. We are good at doing things but we lack a conscience or sub-conscience understanding of why we are doing the things we do.

Our kids are taught, very young, to play a very straight ahead and take it yourself kind of game. When for four years that is what has been cheered by Mom and Dad, the idea of passing, assists, off the ball movement are not going to be implemented. We don’t value play without the ball enough to pass on those virtues that are the ultimate foundation of true team play. We simply try and reprogram very individual players.

Look at players in a U10/11 tryout setting. The kids who dribble, dribble, dribble get picked and the kid who makes the smart pass that keeps the ball for their team never sees the ball again and doesn’t get picked.

For everyone of you who says this is the problem, there is another person who will say that American children rely too much on passing the ball and don't develop the individual one on one skills to develop successful teams...

LOL said nobody ever.

There are actually a lot of people who say the problem is too much passing at tactics and young ages and the youngest kids need to just dribble dribble dribble until they have control of the ball and then you can work on passing.