Creating numbers up... the wrong way?

My youngest son, Lance will sign his National Letter of Intent next week. As part of the recruiting process, we have watched film of how each college that has pursued him plays on the pitch.  As regular readers of this blog can attest, I am a huge fan of watching match film. There are great learning opportunities to be found in how others approach the game.

Over the course of Lance's high school playing career it was frustrating to watch his team attempt to attack. They were very much about playing in the (right) outside channel. Predictably so.  Now, I do not have a problem with channel play, per se. No, the problem I have his high school teams form of channel play is how they go about attempting to create numbers up situations for play in the channel. After watching film of a certain local college side who has had considerable influence on the high school program I have a deeper appreciation for why the high school coaching staffs attempted to play as a they did.

The danger lies in isolating the creation of numbers up situations to the exclusion of other facets of the game, namely playing in space to allow for playing with pace.  With the high school side, the weak side wing players were either instructed to come ball side or were allowed to do so when the team attacked. Ostensibly this was to help create numbers up situations around the ball. 

If we refer back to Sun Tzu Soccer we find there is some validation for manipulating an opponent to move numerical strength to one side of the pitch. The advantage is in opening space and weakening the opponents ability to defend in another area of the pitch.  However, if the intention is not to exploit the space and weakness created, then all that is accomplished is to self-deny space and time in the ball side channel thoroughly negating any numbers up situations created.  And this is indeed what we saw from the high school side as they struggled all season long to generate any sustained offense - they were their own worst enemies in that they self-inflicted pressure to an extent they were not capable of playing securely from it.

Creating Numbers Up for Combination Play.

The reason to create numbers up situations on the attack is to allow two (or more) attacking players to isolate a single defender.  This is where the recognition and execution of the cues for combination passing come into play.  A key element in combination passing is having space for the ball carrier to engage the lone defender.  Making the defender commit to defending the ball opens teammates to be used to help defeat the pressure defender.  If the ball side is overloaded with attacking teammates the space required to execute combination passing is severely limited and restricted.  This is exactly what happened throughout the high school season for Lance's team.

Now, there is value to cluttering the space in one outside channel ... IF this is done so intentionally to be able to cross the ball to and play in the other outside channel.  This is something our club team did often and with great success.  No so much for Lance's high school team. Whereas our club team would often run two players to ball side in front of the action in a purposeful attempt to manipulate the opponents defense, the high school team seemed to purposefully run players to ball side at or near the level of the ball which allowed opposing back lines to stay relatively stationary in their comfort zones within their preferred defensive shape.  This is why the high school team struggled with early crosses while the club team excelled at early crosses. 

It's all about having proper space and time to allow attackers to dictate the pace of play. The club team was the maestro in dictating not only where on the pitch the ball would be played, but also by whom and at what pace.  The high school team, through self-inflicting pressure via their own player movement allowed the opponents defense to dictate the pace and rhythm of the game.

Ball movement is predicated on player movement.  I 100% believe this to be true. We might expand on this by saying intentional and purposeful ball movement is predicated on intentional and purposeful player movement.  It is not enough just to be in constant motion on the pitch.  The high school team had 3 or 4 players who were exceptional at being in constant motion, but so much of their motion, their effort, produced little in the way of positive team results. In fact, they were the prime perpetrators of self-inflicting pressure on both themselves and their teammates.

Another way of stating the need for intentional and purposeful player movement can be found in the old basketball / soccer adage that mandates making your movement benefit a teammate - playing for your teammate or making a run for your teammate.  Every attacking movement on the soccer pitch should be purposeful.  A run into open space. A run to create space. 

A run into open space will draw a defender to that run.  The consequence of the defenders movement is creation of space or a seam somewhere behind him.  When attacking, the club team emphasizes passing to the second man running.  That is a second run being made on the heels of the first runner who is drawing the defender away. That second runner is often open when cutting up field on the heels of the defender following the first runner.  It is a simple and easy means of creating a numbers up situation by forcing a defender to respect the first runner / threat and then passing behind the defender to the second runner.

In effect, the first run into space purposefully created space for a teammate to run into / be played the ball into and through.  When runners are brought to the ball side channel in front of the ball and engage the opposing backs the space being created is to the weak side or outside the width of the opposing backs - the early cross.  The ball side runners ultimately benefit from their own selfless runs. Upon an early cross the defense will shift back across the pitch to deal with the changing threat leaving those runners free on what has become the back post side.   Again, the cub team was very adept at this while the high school team never did find this solution to their attacking problems. 

Is it any wonder why the club teams averaged 4+ goals per game against some of the best competition throughout the Midwest while the high school team struggled to score even one goal per game against an average high school schedule? 

It has been posited to me that the club team had a roster of all-stars, that it was the talent that made the difference.  We did have a roster of all-stars on the "A" team. We also took on all comers.  What of our club "B" team?  The overall talent on the "B" team was no better than an average high school team and they still managed to score 3+ goals a game and defeated some very good opponents using the same attacking philosophy of the "A" team.   The idea that a high school team cannot employ the attacking strategies being advocated here is a product of one of two things; 1) Lack of knowledge on the coaching staffs part and or 2) Laziness to implement the attacking strategies on the coaching staffs part.  I know, for I implemented these attacking strategies to turn around a moribund high school program and turn them into a powerhouse in under 2 years time. 

The point of relating these teams stories to you is rather simple, a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing.  It is foolishness to emphasize one aspect of play in the belief it is the answer to the overall level of play.  Each part of play is dependent on all other parts of play.  Simply creating numbers up can be achieved by flooding a channel of play, but to what end?  If the bigger picture is not seen and the whole of the pitch is not used, why bother creating numbers up situations in the first place?  Effort alone is just not enough. Intelligent effort is required.  Purposeful effort is required. 

Lance's high school team was infected with Ballwatchingitus and the efforts and movements of many of their players reflected this.  The majority of their movements were made for the ball with far too few of their movements being made for a teammate or for one another.  They allowed the focus of opponents defenses to remain on the ball and too rarely challenged opposing defenses to account for player movement away from the ball, player movement outside the defenses direct line of vision to the ball.

When coaching / teaching a team how to create numbers up situations I encourage you to focus on the broader concepts involved in being numbers up; 1) it's a great way to defeat a single defender and 2) it forces other defenders to move to compensate for their beaten teammate as well as 3) creates space to be exploited in other areas of the opponents defense, especially on the back side of the opponents defensive shape.  Make sure your team is prepared to utilize and exploit all valued gained from creating a numbers up situation for if it is not the resulting self-inflicted pressure surely defeats the purpose of creating numbers up situations, does it not?