All the long hours spent on the camp circuit are worthwhile when I see a team come together and grow as one. This was the case this past week as I watched the Lima Senior Spartans play summer league games after having had the pleasure of working with them in a camp setting at the end of June. I had actually watched the Spartans play a summer league game before camp started to get a feel for where the team was. I spoke with head coach Mitch Monfort about what he wanted to work on during camp. From these observations and discussions I put a plan together for camp. The camp went well and I was eager to see the players in live game situations.
I was not disappointed in what I saw and as the evening wore on became pleasantly surprised at the growth taking place before my very eyes. Disciplined defense complimented by versatility on the attack is what I preach and teach. Over the course of a doubleheader one evening last week this is exactly what I observed. The first match was against the Lima Central Catholic entry in summer league play. The defense was stout and the attack effective albeit a little too direct at times. However, I really do not have a problem with direct play if this is what the defense is giving us. The Spartans found an advantage and exploited it to a rather easy victory. The problem I do have with direct play is when it becomes a teams attacking identity.
Versatility is the key when attacking.
In the second match the Spartans faced a veteran team from Continental that was physically big, deep and fairly well talented. The challenge for Lima Senior in this match would be markedly different than the one Lima Central Catholic presented in the first match of the evening. An added degree of difficulty would be in evidence as the Spartans would play their second match of the evening against a rested opponent. These are the type of challenges that should be embraced during the preseason months as they help prepare a team for obstacles they will encounter when their regular season starts.
About midway through a scoreless first half the Spartans began finding a rhythm with their attack. It had become evident to them the direct attack that had worked so very well against LCC in the first match was not going to generate the same type of results in the second match against Continental. What I became very excited about was the collective problem solving ability the team displayed in recognizing the need to change their attacking philosophy to meet the new challenge presented by a different opponent.
In the second half of the match against Continental the Spartans had a 10-12 minute stretch that saw them play in a manner worthy of soccer being called the beautiful game. There was patience and poise on display as the team moved the ball side to side, backward and forward forcing their opponents defense to continually move and shift until seams opened through which to attack. And attack the Spartans did with pace!
As I sat in the stands watching this display I couldn't help but smile. The problem solving ability on display coupled with the use of technical, tactical, physical and psychological tools the team is developing were on display. By no means was it a finished product. There is certainly much to work on, but they laid a foundation on which to build. Over the course of 3 hours on a summer evening a noticeable display of improvement played out before our eyes. A good start. Definitely a satisfying moment yet that satisfaction can be but a fleeting moment as there is much work to be done if the team is to be satisfied with its performance four months from now at the end of their season.
Welcome to the web home of Conceive Believe Achieve Soccer. We specialize in conducting high school team camps. This website began as a means to promote our camps and keep campers informed of upcoming opportunities. There are now over 650 articles archived here. Use the search function in the right hand column below to find ones on topic for you. You may contact us at coachtjbrown@gmail.com or 567-204-6083 Thanks for visiting!
Showing posts with label direct play. Show all posts
Showing posts with label direct play. Show all posts
Sunday
Friday
What is Possession Style Soccer?
The idea of one team controlling the ball better and more than their opponents is likely what came to mind when you read the title for this article. At the most basic level this is a fair assessment of possession style soccer. It is difficult to score if you do not have possession of the ball, correct? By controlling the ball, a team controls the game.
I am not entirely comfortable with the notion that a successful possession style of soccer is tied to winning the time of possession battle. I in no way wish to diminish the importance or value of possessing the ball. I am simply saying there must exist a purpose for possessing the ball - to score the ball or to prevent the opponent from scoring the ball.
As soccer is a game about problem solving we can look at possession in those terms as well. When in possession a team has a singular problem to solve - how to score the ball. When not in possession a team has a two-fold problem to solve - how to gain possession and then how to score the ball. In my mind I would much prefer solving one problem well than having to devote resources to solving two problems.
Possession can also be viewed in terms of energy expended in playing the game. Possessing the ball, especially when done with intelligent thought and intent, conserves energy for the team in possession while making the opponent expend large amounts of physical, mental and possibly emotional energy in pursuit of possession of the ball. When ball movement is predicated on player movement a team in possession can force the defending team to chase the ball. That would be one description of effective possession of the soccer ball.
Obviously the most effective use of possession is to score the soccer ball. Forcing a team to expend energy chasing the ball while you progress toward scoring the ball might be alternatively described as a by-product of a possession style of soccer. The same could be said of possessing the ball to prevent the opponent from being able to score.
Because we live in a world of opposites, if there exists effective uses of possession it stands to reason there must exist ineffective uses of possession. Teams and maybe more appropriately players who are constantly creating 50 / 50 balls could certainly be accused of ineffective use of possession. A direct style of play predicated solely on kicking the ball forward for someone to run onto might be ineffective use of possession. That is not a knock on direct play, only a knock on thoughtlessly whacking the ball forward. I like direct play as a versatile part of our teams attack.
To look at direct play as part of possession play requires looking at one simple question, How many passes does it take to score a goal?
If your forward steals the ball from a defender along the top of the opponents penalty area, shoots and scores the answer could be as low as "zero" passes required to score. So, a directly played ball out of the middle third of the field to a teammate who shoots and scores is effective use of possession, is it not? In fact, there have been several studies conducted that suggest a preponderance of goals scored come from 3 or less passes made. The pressing defense system of play so talked about and utilized today has been built around this very idea. Regained possession immediately in the attacking third to catch the opponents shape in a transitional moment allowing for your team to strike quickly on goal. Makes perfect sense.
In coaching possession soccer with my team this spring I will return to my basketball roots and concentrate on Space and Pace. If we look at the previous example of a ball won in the midfield leading to one pass from which a goal is scored there was obviously space, negative space to be exact, available in behind the opponents defense to be utilized. One pass was sufficient.
When the opposition presses upon losing possession the attacking team may be required to execute a Safe Pass to secure possession before moving personnel and the ball forward on the attack. Pressing has a two-fold purpose for most teams, 1) Regain possession and / or 2) Allow teammates to get organized behind the ball. If the attackers are able to successfully execute a safe pass out of the press, then they will likely have to begin a "delayed" attack in the sense the opportunity to quick counter may have been lost. When this occurs the conventional ideas of possessing the ball come into play. The attack (forward movement of the ball) will be based around probing the defense, recycling the ball backwards and switching the point of attack in search of a seam to move forward through.
In this sense, possession first becomes about moving the ball to move the opposition. In moving the opposition - what we call manipulating the defense - the attacking team seeks to create the space they wish to exploit. Remember in the direct play scenario, the (negative) space to play into already existed. When a defense is set behind the ball, space will likely need to be created by moving the opponents, by manipulating the defense to change from its preferred shape. Probe, recycle backwards, switch the point of attack all with a watchful eye on developing seams to attack forward through.
It is critically important to remember the sequence for manipulating a defense is to:
1) Probe - forward movement of the ball to a target player to get defenders behind him to step forward.
2) Recycle - drop passes for the purpose of getting defenders to step forward again
3) Switch - to force a defense to move laterally/
Once a defense is moving backwards and forwards as well as side to side it's preferred shape is in peril and seams to attack the goal through will develop and become exposed for exploitation. There is no set number of passes for when this well occur. There is no set number of passes that defines "possessing the ball". A successful possession might require as few as one pass or as many passes as it takes.
I am not entirely comfortable with the notion that a successful possession style of soccer is tied to winning the time of possession battle. I in no way wish to diminish the importance or value of possessing the ball. I am simply saying there must exist a purpose for possessing the ball - to score the ball or to prevent the opponent from scoring the ball.
As soccer is a game about problem solving we can look at possession in those terms as well. When in possession a team has a singular problem to solve - how to score the ball. When not in possession a team has a two-fold problem to solve - how to gain possession and then how to score the ball. In my mind I would much prefer solving one problem well than having to devote resources to solving two problems.
Possession can also be viewed in terms of energy expended in playing the game. Possessing the ball, especially when done with intelligent thought and intent, conserves energy for the team in possession while making the opponent expend large amounts of physical, mental and possibly emotional energy in pursuit of possession of the ball. When ball movement is predicated on player movement a team in possession can force the defending team to chase the ball. That would be one description of effective possession of the soccer ball.
Obviously the most effective use of possession is to score the soccer ball. Forcing a team to expend energy chasing the ball while you progress toward scoring the ball might be alternatively described as a by-product of a possession style of soccer. The same could be said of possessing the ball to prevent the opponent from being able to score.
Because we live in a world of opposites, if there exists effective uses of possession it stands to reason there must exist ineffective uses of possession. Teams and maybe more appropriately players who are constantly creating 50 / 50 balls could certainly be accused of ineffective use of possession. A direct style of play predicated solely on kicking the ball forward for someone to run onto might be ineffective use of possession. That is not a knock on direct play, only a knock on thoughtlessly whacking the ball forward. I like direct play as a versatile part of our teams attack.
To look at direct play as part of possession play requires looking at one simple question, How many passes does it take to score a goal?
If your forward steals the ball from a defender along the top of the opponents penalty area, shoots and scores the answer could be as low as "zero" passes required to score. So, a directly played ball out of the middle third of the field to a teammate who shoots and scores is effective use of possession, is it not? In fact, there have been several studies conducted that suggest a preponderance of goals scored come from 3 or less passes made. The pressing defense system of play so talked about and utilized today has been built around this very idea. Regained possession immediately in the attacking third to catch the opponents shape in a transitional moment allowing for your team to strike quickly on goal. Makes perfect sense.
In coaching possession soccer with my team this spring I will return to my basketball roots and concentrate on Space and Pace. If we look at the previous example of a ball won in the midfield leading to one pass from which a goal is scored there was obviously space, negative space to be exact, available in behind the opponents defense to be utilized. One pass was sufficient.
When the opposition presses upon losing possession the attacking team may be required to execute a Safe Pass to secure possession before moving personnel and the ball forward on the attack. Pressing has a two-fold purpose for most teams, 1) Regain possession and / or 2) Allow teammates to get organized behind the ball. If the attackers are able to successfully execute a safe pass out of the press, then they will likely have to begin a "delayed" attack in the sense the opportunity to quick counter may have been lost. When this occurs the conventional ideas of possessing the ball come into play. The attack (forward movement of the ball) will be based around probing the defense, recycling the ball backwards and switching the point of attack in search of a seam to move forward through.
In this sense, possession first becomes about moving the ball to move the opposition. In moving the opposition - what we call manipulating the defense - the attacking team seeks to create the space they wish to exploit. Remember in the direct play scenario, the (negative) space to play into already existed. When a defense is set behind the ball, space will likely need to be created by moving the opponents, by manipulating the defense to change from its preferred shape. Probe, recycle backwards, switch the point of attack all with a watchful eye on developing seams to attack forward through.
It is critically important to remember the sequence for manipulating a defense is to:
1) Probe - forward movement of the ball to a target player to get defenders behind him to step forward.
2) Recycle - drop passes for the purpose of getting defenders to step forward again
3) Switch - to force a defense to move laterally/
Once a defense is moving backwards and forwards as well as side to side it's preferred shape is in peril and seams to attack the goal through will develop and become exposed for exploitation. There is no set number of passes for when this well occur. There is no set number of passes that defines "possessing the ball". A successful possession might require as few as one pass or as many passes as it takes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)