Gain Possession
Maintain Possession
Utilize Possession
Strike on Goal!
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 finishing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label finishing. Show all posts
Tuesday
Sunday
Outside backs in the 1-4-2-3-1 and 1-4-1-4-1 formations
Previous articles in this series:
The Goalkeeper
The Linking Midfielder
The Center Midfielder
The Attacking Midfielder
The Central Midfield Triangle
The Center Backs
How the Center Backs and Linking Midfielder interact.
The technical considerations for the outside back positions center around speed - physical, pace of play and especially in decision making ability. The ability to run onto the able coupled with a high quality of first touch and the ability to run with the ball / speed dribble. Outside backs must be able to cross the ball early and effectively along the ground and through the air. They also need to be able to finish around the net with a high degree of accuracy and pace.
Tactically outside backs must be defenders first. They have a responsibility to cover the inside back nearest them and defend either at the outer edge of the 18 or on the flank in the defending third dependent on the teams philosophy for covering width in the final third. Outside backs must be astute game watchers especially on the attack as they will be called upon to make frequent calculated runs up the field in support of the attack and as vital main contributors to the attack.
Physically we like otsider backs to be runners. Work rate is extremely important and arguably second only to that of central midfielders. Endurance is key. Speed of play is essential. Patient on defense and aggressive in the attack.
Psychologically these players need to have to be disciplined on defense and risk takers in the attack. They are defenders of the goal, but also man the position most capable of forcing a defense from its preferred shape through their runs up the field and long early crosses to switch the point of attack.
I recently conducted camp at Piqua High School and it came to pass that I coached the team in a preseason tournament as well. For that tournament match I place, arguably, the teams two best players at the outside back positions and asked of them that they be very offensive minded. I saw the look on their coaches faces when I did this - they were skeptical. Piqua won that match 2-0 despite being down some players and facing a decent side. Now, the success did not lie solely in playing these two at outside back, but their presence there did not hurt the team defensively and did create problems for the opposing side. My point is simply this, we as coaches must be mindful of our ability to manipulate the opposing defense. We must be able to stress the opponents defense to identify and expose where it is weakest so that we might take full advantage.
The rule of thumb for placing players in positions is to build a strong spine in your formation and fill outwards. All I did with the Piqua team was to build a strong defensive spine and place the emphasis for attacking on the flanks... (hopefully) away from the opponents strength which I assumed would be their central players. It worked.
The Goalkeeper
The Linking Midfielder
The Center Midfielder
The Attacking Midfielder
The Central Midfield Triangle
The Center Backs
How the Center Backs and Linking Midfielder interact.
The technical considerations for the outside back positions center around speed - physical, pace of play and especially in decision making ability. The ability to run onto the able coupled with a high quality of first touch and the ability to run with the ball / speed dribble. Outside backs must be able to cross the ball early and effectively along the ground and through the air. They also need to be able to finish around the net with a high degree of accuracy and pace.
Tactically outside backs must be defenders first. They have a responsibility to cover the inside back nearest them and defend either at the outer edge of the 18 or on the flank in the defending third dependent on the teams philosophy for covering width in the final third. Outside backs must be astute game watchers especially on the attack as they will be called upon to make frequent calculated runs up the field in support of the attack and as vital main contributors to the attack.
Physically we like otsider backs to be runners. Work rate is extremely important and arguably second only to that of central midfielders. Endurance is key. Speed of play is essential. Patient on defense and aggressive in the attack.
Psychologically these players need to have to be disciplined on defense and risk takers in the attack. They are defenders of the goal, but also man the position most capable of forcing a defense from its preferred shape through their runs up the field and long early crosses to switch the point of attack.
I recently conducted camp at Piqua High School and it came to pass that I coached the team in a preseason tournament as well. For that tournament match I place, arguably, the teams two best players at the outside back positions and asked of them that they be very offensive minded. I saw the look on their coaches faces when I did this - they were skeptical. Piqua won that match 2-0 despite being down some players and facing a decent side. Now, the success did not lie solely in playing these two at outside back, but their presence there did not hurt the team defensively and did create problems for the opposing side. My point is simply this, we as coaches must be mindful of our ability to manipulate the opposing defense. We must be able to stress the opponents defense to identify and expose where it is weakest so that we might take full advantage.
The rule of thumb for placing players in positions is to build a strong spine in your formation and fill outwards. All I did with the Piqua team was to build a strong defensive spine and place the emphasis for attacking on the flanks... (hopefully) away from the opponents strength which I assumed would be their central players. It worked.
Monday
Analyzing Team Play / Problem Solving in Soccer
If you go to any Internet soccer forum or message board you will find a frequent topic of discussion is conversion rates on shots taken at goal. This is one of the areas I am most often asked to address in the team camps I conduct. There seems to a general consensus in thought that a magical drill or practice exercise exists that can improve a teams ability to score goals. Of course, this just isn't true. In fact, the reasons a team struggles to finish can often times be a lot more complicated than one might suspect. Before coming up with appropriate exercises to address a teams struggles to score I have to figure out why they are struggling to score.
A friend contacted me after the 2012 high school season lamenting his team generated 22 shots on goal for the entire season. On the other hand, they had converted on 21 of those chances!
For our purposes here we will use the official FIFA definition for shots on goal: A shot on goal sees the struck ball travel within the frame of the goal and results either in a goal being scored or a save being made. So, if the shot strikes post or bar and bounces out, this is not considered a shot on goal. And, of course, any shot high or wide of the goal is not considered a shot on goal.
The coach referenced above is a former college goalkeeper and knows the correct definition of a shot on goal. So I was really curious as to how a team could convert on 21 of 22 chances. That is one of the most confounding statistics I have ever heard of. No wonder he was interested in getting his team to take more shots on goal!
The question I had to answer was, why only 22 shots on goal over the course of 17 games?
The first hint I got was the coach telling me his team refused to shoot from distance. They insisted on being at nearly point blank range before attempting a shot. Aha! That explains the tremendous conversion rate. It also provided a vital clue in terms of questioning why they only took 22 shots on goal. My suspicion was a lack of striking skill and this was confirmed during my first session with the team. They didn't take more shots or shots from greater range because they could not execute the required skill to do so. Now, I knew where to begin addressing the issue of generating more shots.
As I said earlier, it's not always so simple to diagnose why a team struggles in a certain facet of play. The team my son plays on this fall is struggling to score goals. They generate enough shots on goal but struggle to finish. They strike the ball well and can shoot from distance. So, why do they struggle to finish?
I believe there are a number of reasons all inter-related.
1) Play in the final third is too slow. The team is fast enough in the initial stages of attack, but are slow in moving the ball once in the attacking third. Especially slow in moving the ball to the feet of an open shooter in front of the face of the goal.
2) There is a reluctance to take an isolated defender to goal in 1 v 1 situations. Wingers carrying the ball into the attacking third only to stop their advance instead of cutting in on the defender, getting their shoulder ahead of the defender to eliminate him from play and going strong at goal.
.
3) This is directly related to #2 above: The team plays too much on the flanks. It is good to break through on the flanks but the ball must be carried inside or passed inside at the earliest possible moment. The team in question is slow to do this resulting in many of their shots being taken from the wedge (Corner, corner, post) or wider. These are poor angles to shoot from as the opposing goalkeeper need only defend 4 yards of goal or less leaving little room for error on the placement of the shot.
4) Poor utilization of space in the attacking third. This is one of the most common problems I encounter when working with teams. Teams either fill the space they want to play in far too soon or do so far too late. Both are occurring with this team.
For instance, when a wing does take on a defender 1 v 1 and a cross is forthcoming I often see teammates running abreast of the wing and at the same pace as the wing carrying the ball. It is a flat line of 3-5 attackers. What we should see are the three elements of the game represented - Penetration, Depth and Width. A lone attacker pushing defenders back upon their goal to free up space in front of them to be played in. Other attackers trailing the play centrally waiting for the cross to be played and timing their runs onto it. With a late trailer hanging back to play rebounds or a poorly crossed ball. And an attacker making the Corner, Corner Post run from the weak side. In this manner the goal is properly framed to play the cross from a variety of angles.
In other instances the timing of crosses is off. They come far too soon as central attackers have yet to arrive in position to play the ball. Sometimes the CF and AM's are pulled wide and other times they are either slow getting to the face of the goal or the crosses come much too soon. This team has crossed the ball fairly well, but all too often the timing is off with central attackers being slow to arrive or worse yet no one present to finish.
5) Taking too long to get a shot off. There seems to be a need on the part of some players to set up the perfect shot.There is an absence of toe pokes and volleys. A lack of understanding that it matters not how the ball goes in, just so that it goes in... legally, of course.
Okay, now that the problem and the reasons for it have been identified how can it be solved?
In my opinion, the main point to be addressed is how the attacking players link together in the attacking third. The team plays a standard 4-3-3 with a DM and 2 AM's in the midfield triangle. In theory, this should present as a wing player with the ball supported by an outside back leaving a CF and 2 AM's centrally and the weak side wing on the back side of the play.
Again, in my opinion, this years team does not have the right personnel to play this version of the 4-3-3. There does not appear to be a defensive mid capable of distributing the ball to all four channels. There are passes to space in the outside channels but far too few passes to feet in the inside channels. The CF and AM's are bunching up and actually helping the defense by cluttering the very space the attack should be looking to open up and use to score goals from.
I would suggest tweaking the standard 4-3-3 to be played as a 4 - 2- 3- 1. This is simply inverting the midfield triangle to having two DM's and one attacking mid.
The reason for doing this is quite simple. The team has an abundance of wing players but is short on inside players. The team also has two terrific passers to man those DM mid positions, provide support for the attack and make forward runs. Neither is a true defensive mid, however. Another option might be to pair them as AM's. That hasn't been tried yet either. Both are dynamic, creative players that could play make with and off of one another.
With two DM's one supports wide behind the ball and the other remains central. Weak side width support is then the responsibility of the weak side outside back. The CF and AM must work in conjunction with one another in the attacking third, somewhat like forwards in a 2 forward set.
Still attacking with 7 players, but now linking them differently and playing more to their strengths.
The overriding consideration in instances like this is "If all you ever do, is all you've ever done, all you'll ever get is what you have always had."
Change.
In the team camp this summer the focus changed from generating more chances to the technical skills required to execute on the chances they were generating. In the second case here the idea is to maintain the quantity of chances, but change the quality of chances being generated.
A friend contacted me after the 2012 high school season lamenting his team generated 22 shots on goal for the entire season. On the other hand, they had converted on 21 of those chances!
For our purposes here we will use the official FIFA definition for shots on goal: A shot on goal sees the struck ball travel within the frame of the goal and results either in a goal being scored or a save being made. So, if the shot strikes post or bar and bounces out, this is not considered a shot on goal. And, of course, any shot high or wide of the goal is not considered a shot on goal.
The coach referenced above is a former college goalkeeper and knows the correct definition of a shot on goal. So I was really curious as to how a team could convert on 21 of 22 chances. That is one of the most confounding statistics I have ever heard of. No wonder he was interested in getting his team to take more shots on goal!
The question I had to answer was, why only 22 shots on goal over the course of 17 games?
The first hint I got was the coach telling me his team refused to shoot from distance. They insisted on being at nearly point blank range before attempting a shot. Aha! That explains the tremendous conversion rate. It also provided a vital clue in terms of questioning why they only took 22 shots on goal. My suspicion was a lack of striking skill and this was confirmed during my first session with the team. They didn't take more shots or shots from greater range because they could not execute the required skill to do so. Now, I knew where to begin addressing the issue of generating more shots.
As I said earlier, it's not always so simple to diagnose why a team struggles in a certain facet of play. The team my son plays on this fall is struggling to score goals. They generate enough shots on goal but struggle to finish. They strike the ball well and can shoot from distance. So, why do they struggle to finish?
I believe there are a number of reasons all inter-related.
1) Play in the final third is too slow. The team is fast enough in the initial stages of attack, but are slow in moving the ball once in the attacking third. Especially slow in moving the ball to the feet of an open shooter in front of the face of the goal.
2) There is a reluctance to take an isolated defender to goal in 1 v 1 situations. Wingers carrying the ball into the attacking third only to stop their advance instead of cutting in on the defender, getting their shoulder ahead of the defender to eliminate him from play and going strong at goal.
.
3) This is directly related to #2 above: The team plays too much on the flanks. It is good to break through on the flanks but the ball must be carried inside or passed inside at the earliest possible moment. The team in question is slow to do this resulting in many of their shots being taken from the wedge (Corner, corner, post) or wider. These are poor angles to shoot from as the opposing goalkeeper need only defend 4 yards of goal or less leaving little room for error on the placement of the shot.
4) Poor utilization of space in the attacking third. This is one of the most common problems I encounter when working with teams. Teams either fill the space they want to play in far too soon or do so far too late. Both are occurring with this team.
For instance, when a wing does take on a defender 1 v 1 and a cross is forthcoming I often see teammates running abreast of the wing and at the same pace as the wing carrying the ball. It is a flat line of 3-5 attackers. What we should see are the three elements of the game represented - Penetration, Depth and Width. A lone attacker pushing defenders back upon their goal to free up space in front of them to be played in. Other attackers trailing the play centrally waiting for the cross to be played and timing their runs onto it. With a late trailer hanging back to play rebounds or a poorly crossed ball. And an attacker making the Corner, Corner Post run from the weak side. In this manner the goal is properly framed to play the cross from a variety of angles.
In other instances the timing of crosses is off. They come far too soon as central attackers have yet to arrive in position to play the ball. Sometimes the CF and AM's are pulled wide and other times they are either slow getting to the face of the goal or the crosses come much too soon. This team has crossed the ball fairly well, but all too often the timing is off with central attackers being slow to arrive or worse yet no one present to finish.
5) Taking too long to get a shot off. There seems to be a need on the part of some players to set up the perfect shot.There is an absence of toe pokes and volleys. A lack of understanding that it matters not how the ball goes in, just so that it goes in... legally, of course.
Okay, now that the problem and the reasons for it have been identified how can it be solved?
In my opinion, the main point to be addressed is how the attacking players link together in the attacking third. The team plays a standard 4-3-3 with a DM and 2 AM's in the midfield triangle. In theory, this should present as a wing player with the ball supported by an outside back leaving a CF and 2 AM's centrally and the weak side wing on the back side of the play.
Again, in my opinion, this years team does not have the right personnel to play this version of the 4-3-3. There does not appear to be a defensive mid capable of distributing the ball to all four channels. There are passes to space in the outside channels but far too few passes to feet in the inside channels. The CF and AM's are bunching up and actually helping the defense by cluttering the very space the attack should be looking to open up and use to score goals from.
I would suggest tweaking the standard 4-3-3 to be played as a 4 - 2- 3- 1. This is simply inverting the midfield triangle to having two DM's and one attacking mid.
The reason for doing this is quite simple. The team has an abundance of wing players but is short on inside players. The team also has two terrific passers to man those DM mid positions, provide support for the attack and make forward runs. Neither is a true defensive mid, however. Another option might be to pair them as AM's. That hasn't been tried yet either. Both are dynamic, creative players that could play make with and off of one another.
With two DM's one supports wide behind the ball and the other remains central. Weak side width support is then the responsibility of the weak side outside back. The CF and AM must work in conjunction with one another in the attacking third, somewhat like forwards in a 2 forward set.
Still attacking with 7 players, but now linking them differently and playing more to their strengths.
The overriding consideration in instances like this is "If all you ever do, is all you've ever done, all you'll ever get is what you have always had."
Change.
In the team camp this summer the focus changed from generating more chances to the technical skills required to execute on the chances they were generating. In the second case here the idea is to maintain the quantity of chances, but change the quality of chances being generated.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)