I'm going to focus on football. Surprise. The reason for that is because football is quite an open, random game, with so many factors, variables, competitors, and techniques. Bowling is a sport that is constant. There are obviously different techniques necessary to apply spin, power, or accuracy on the throw, and the scenarios come down to the distances and angles of the remaining pins. A lot of the variation in the sport comes from the subtle movements in the same wrist, following the same run up, along the same lane, in the same order of contestants. The pins don't become bigger or smaller, there is no one blocking you, and your performance is entirely down to your ability to execute effectively.
In a game such as bowling, is there really a need for tactics? Surely the objective is the same every time, right? Knock down all ten pins? So we're merely considering the appropriate technique to use each time we step up to bowl. If there is a split, we are stuck between guaranteeing nine points, or risking it for a spare. That comes down to your ability, not what the opposition is doing. In football, the closest thing to bowling is perhaps taking a penalty. Same distance and angle every time, with one player choosing the correct technique to use. The difference is that there is a goalkeeper that will be attempting to block the shot. Now it becomes a bit more strategic. What was his last penalty like? What was your last penalty like? What are his weaknesses? What are your weaknesses? Could you disguise your shot? If you did disguise it, what's the likelihood of successful skill execution? Simply by adding a direct opponent, we're now becoming tactical.
When selecting practice type, it will fall somewhere along this spectrum. Constant is doing the exact same thing over and over again, such as right-footed side-foot passing, one touch, in pairs, over a distance of eight yards. Or hitting a tennis ball against a wall. Or Squats. Random is the full game itself, where anything can happen. Along the way from constant to random, we can add players, manipulate spaces, and add rules, conditions, and challenges. Think of it in terms of variety of techniques that can be used, and variety of decisions that can be made.
A clear example of a constant would be the above Coerver video, which shows a young girl demonstrating the toe role technique. She's doing it over and over again. Practice makes permanent. You may wonder what is she learning there? Agility, balance, coordination. Her left hip in particular is going to feel the burn after doing this for a minute. Switch legs, and if she is very one footed, like a lot of us are, then she's going to do the same on her weak side, which will very rarely be utilised in a match. Remember that footballers are not arm wrestlers, and need to have equal strength on both sides. These kinds of ball manipulation skills are great for teaching players how to control and move the ball around their body, whilst also keeping their head up. Eventually, they gain enough competence that they only need to have the ball in their peripheral vision, and thus will be better equipped at scanning and evaluating the play around them.
Does it teach you how to play football? Absolutely not.
This clip comes from the Nike Academy. We've moved ever so slightly away from constant. It's not just the technique of passing, but also receiving. Both passing and receiving need consideration of angles and distances, so we now have a decision to be made. Sure, the player has to be aware of which of his three teammates doesn't have a ball, as the free man, but that becomes autonomous when you realise there is a pattern to it. The player in the middle is opening up their body to receive, and playing the ball out. Due to the high proficiency of the players on the outside, most of the passes are very good, meaning the player in the middle can expect the same type of pass pretty much every time. Although the players on the outside are passing, it's still annoying to see them standing there and not doing much.
Does it teach you how to play football? Not really. Just by learning to pass and receive doesn't mean you understand its value, nor do you understand where and when to do it. Or how to shoot. Or how to tackle.
This rondo by Barcelona is moving slightly further up the scale as we're adding in choices. There are decisions to be made. It's certainly more random, but is still very constant. All passing is one touch, the players do not move, and the only technique being worked is the different types of one touch passes. There was a flick, a roll, a poke, as well as side foot passes. The decision making is which teammate to pass to, which is influenced based on where the defenders are. With teammates around, it also incorporates communication and the reading of triggers, which are two sources of input players need to be aware of when making their decisions.
Does it teach you how to play football? It teaches players how to play one touch passes when in tight situations, with a support network already in place.
We move further along the spectrum again for this 8v3 type rondo. The players on the outside have two touches, meaning they have a decision about their first touch, as well as the pass. There's also the support angles that one has to make to receive, as well as receiving the ball. With three defenders, we'v not just got pressure, but pressure and cover, with perhaps a bit of balance. The objective is to split the defence by playing that through ball. This provides more variety of decisions, considering where the defenders are, scanning for gaps, analysing the ability for the teammate to receive, and then weighing up all those factors against what type of pass to make. And if you can't split them? Retain. Play the easy ball. As for the defenders, no longer are they just bodies, but actually get some use out of the session. They'll be reading triggers, in addition to assessing how to press and cover based on the position of the ball, and the relation of the players around it. Still, it's lacking a transitional element. Drills like this see the mistake made, the game stop, and the defence give the ball back.
Does it teach you how to play football? A little bit. We're now starting to exploit space. There's a little bit about what to do off the ball too.
Not really a Man City 3v3 Shooting Game when none of the players or coaches are Man City, and the coach labels the two teams competing as Manchester United and Newcastle United. Nevertheless, we take another step along that spectrum. We now have attacking and defending within the same drill, and both of them are allowed to score points. There's shooting, tackling, passing, dribbling, and goalkeeping. There's now a larger tactical element, with the coach encouraging players to attack quickly rather than maintain possession. The key for me, which has been missing all along is the transitional element. Before, if the ball was lost, the game stops, we might change round, and we start again. That doesn't happen in football. If we lose the ball, we have to now win it back. It's pressure v counter. This is a very coach centred drill, but that's more down to the coach than the drill design. If the ball goes out, play should be restarted by the players, not the coach. That encourages them to switch on and remain focused. Some people would have a gripe about two teams attacking the same goal, and it's a point I get. We could quite easily add a second goal behind where the coach is stood, and play 3v3 with teams attacking each end like a normal invasion game, rather than a glorified version of knock-out Wembley. In the previous Nike Academy video I moaned about players stood on the side doing very little. It's it bit similar here. If it wasn't for the coach restarting play all the time, they'd be more involved. I think it's great to have players on the outside as wall passers for two reasons; there's always the option to switch play, and it keeps the ball in play more, making the game in the middle far more intense. Having to stop, even if for a couple seconds to get the next ball, slows it down. It's the difference between playing five-a-side indoor with walls, and playing five-a-side in the park with no walls. It's a pain in the arse having to retrieve the football all the time. Also with two goals, the game wouldn't end when the keeper catches it. Instead, he'd be able to start a counter-attack. Yes, there's a transitional element within this drill, but it's not a true transitional element. This is also the first drill we don't see an overload.
Does it teach you how to play football? It does cover many of the required ideas and techniques fundamental to the game. The only problem is repetition v realism. There was a realistic tempo, with many football themes coming out, which is great, yet for a shooting drill, players may not be satisfied with the amount of shots they're getting. A player good on the ball can fake or dribble to create their own shot. A player not so good on the ball requires help from his teammates to create sufficient space to be able to shoot. It is he who may feel he's not had enough opportunity to practise his shooting technique. The question is though; are we teaching technique or decisions? Shooting technique is laces, head over the ball, plant your standing foot, strike through the ball etc. Decisions are first touch direction, weight and direction of pass to set up the shot, assessment of distance and angle to goal, positioning of defenders, whether to shoot, dribble, or pass, and what type of shot to execute based on all the relevant info. It's a lot more random, that's for sure.
This example comes from a UEFA B type session. It's a phase of play working on defending from the front. He uses a large area of the pitch with realistic distances and angles, as well as clear and specific formations and positions. It's very coach centred, again, but this is more down to assessment than anything else. The early parts of this type of session can be slow and clunky as we look to embed a lot of the information in the players. The coach will talk and point a lot. Once it gets going, it starts to look a lot like a portion of an 11v11 game. Why is there no goalkeeper? One can only assume he's been stitched up with numbers, and was expecting more, since this looks like an assessment, or at least an observation. You also don't bring a camera if it's not important. In this drill, we're looking less at technique and more at decisions. We assume that the players are already competent enough technically for the tactical demands of the session. We're coaching distances, angles, awareness, understanding, and response to certain scenarios. There's a lot of realism here due to the numbers and the size of the area. Is there much repetition? Not really. Maybe for the more important players. He mentioned he wants to work more with the two strikers of the team that is pressing the goal. That means one team has priority over the other, and players within that team will be more important too. These types of sessions are for preparing to play against your next opponent, or helping players understand your playing philosophy. If you did this with kids they'd be bored out of their minds. It bores most adults. It's seen as a necessary evil. I need to spend twenty minutes going over a specific type of run that the two forwards have to make as it is key to our victory on Saturday. The rest of you are just bodies. Sounds insulting when put like that, so let's look at it from another angle. You are managing the game at the weekend. Imagine if you had a remote so could stop, pause, rewind play, and also a headset that allowed you to talk exclusively to specific players. That's how it works.
Does it teach you how to play football? You should already know a fair amount of football before being in this type of session. It's very advanced, and the technical element is largely ignored. If you can't do things like pass, shoot, or tackle, and don't understand positioning and formations, a phase of play will not help you at all. Just imagine trying to do this with five year old beginners. Sadly though, that does actually happen.
This is actually an 11v11 practice. The information is more B license level, whereas the setup is more A license. It's a full game, and yet the coach can stop and start wherever he wants. There are no conditions here to manipulate the game. No rules, no areas, just straight football. The coach can provide challenges to players to achieve during the game, as well as feedback, triggers, and clues. When working like this, much like when working within a phase of play, you lose the repetition. In order for your topic to come out, you need to ensure that what you want to happen, does actually happen. Dick Bate is looking at counter-attack. Can he do that if the opposition sit deep, play long, are compact, narrow, don't commit numbers forward? And within his own team, if players can't hit accurate passes in behind the defence, that limits the counters his team can do. There is obviously room for coaching, but the situation is very nuanced, and so much hangs in the balance. In 11v11, it cannot be forced. The opportunities to counter have to be produced organically, or else you lose the realism, which is what you gain sometimes while sacrificing repetition. To play 4v4, starting on the halfway line, with the attackers being able to play behind and go to attack, then reset and start again, provides plenty of repetitions, but how many of those will actually be realistic? There are opponents, they are matched up, rules are normal, both teams can score, there is a transitional element, and teams can switch the play.
Does it teach you how to play football? Twenty-two players and one ball means that only one layer can kick at a time. The rest simply have to wait for the ball to come their way. If you don't already know how to play football, do not go into an 11v11. It will do you no good. Play 3v3 with players of a similar ability. You'll get so many more touches of the ball. That will be far more beneficial to skill development.
None of this means that one is better than the other, and there is no idea place along the spectrum. As coaches we should be looking for the best way to educate our players about a given topic. We must also consider the hidden curriculum. Take for example the Man City 3v3 Shooting Game. Were the players only learning how to shoot? No. There was passing, dribbling, tackling, communication, and goalkeeping. For the very first Coerver Video, there was no hidden curriculum. The player was only learning how to do that specific move. There will have been physical elements that will have been of benefit, but then we have those every time we move.
This also does not mean we should be critical of Coerver or of unopposed technical practices. They are great. In fact, I wish I had done a lot more as a kid. The unopposed technical practice I got as a child was alone in the back garden, smashing shots at a goal from a distance of about twenty yards. That's why I have a rocket shot, through consistent development of that technique. What I don't have is a first touch, or many ball manipulation skills. Those were never taught to us. Perhaps if I'd have been exposed to Coerver type training, I would have done that in the garden as well.
For instance, this video is an absolute favourite of mine. I should have done a lot more of that as a kid. There's no decision making, I get it, that's learnt in games and opposed practices. What it does teach is ability, balance, and coordination, as well as the very important ball manipulation skills. You can't be shown a stepover or a Cruyff turn a couple times, practise it for ten minutes, and then be expected to do it competently. It takes relentless, repetitive practise to get it right. Organisations like Beast Mode Soccer, Coerver, and Brazilian Soccer Schools focus exclusively on technique. It used to be that kids spent ages in the streets and in parks, so would get in the required number of attempts to master such skills. Take that time away from the kids, and it won't happen. The middle class has robbed us of footballers for two reasons; kids from working class families struggle to afford the fees for decent training as teams and organisation compete for middle class dollars and pounds, and those kids with the access to the better facilities and coaches, will also have homework, study, Xbox, and plenty of other classes to go to. The parents will put more emphasis on becoming a lawyer than a footballer. The chances of becoming a lawyer are greater. Before this, and as is still the case in the poorer nations, those kids don't have such distractions or divided time, and also football is their only option as a career, so they better make it.
Let's try to attach numbers to it. Play 5v5 in the street. Ten players, one ball. If all players are equal, one player will have six minutes contact time with that ball in one hour. Go to a Coerver session for an hour, and it's a ball each. The Coerver kid gets 60 minutes from every hour, and goes once per week. The street kid gets 6 minutes per hour, so has to play for ten hours to get as many touches as the Coerver kid. The Coerver kid will also have a coach to correct, challenge, instruct, and guide, whereas the street kid will rely solely on the feedback of trial and error. Seems like the Coerver kid has the advantage over the street kid, but these are not the only relevant factors.
The street kid from Brazil will play football probably four or five hours per day. If he does go to school, it's not like he would go home and do homework. What's the point? He lives in a favela. Education is not important here. The Coerver kid from the middle class family in a Western country will go to Coerver once per week. They may play for a club team, which would mean another game and training session per week. Let's call that four hours per week. The street kid is getting that per day. If that street kid wants more than his share of six minutes of the ball per hour, he has to go out and fight for it. This could mean against bigger, stronger, faster kids. There are no rules in street football. How is he going to win the ball? How is he going to keep it? How is he going to ensure his teammates pass to him? The Coerver kid is given a ball, and performs a series of unopposed skills. Sometimes there will be a bit of opposition, but the focus is more on the muscle memory of reproducing those skills.
You can already see the difference in motivation. The street kid has to play in order to survive. He won't have much in the way of job prospects or education, and the other alternative to football is gangs. He's poor so has no distractions. He doesn't have school holidays, or long summer vacations. His mum isn't forcing him to learn the violin, speak French, and do his geography homework. The Coerver kid will miss training due to birthday parties and conflicts with other extra-curricular activities. When they have finished their hour of training, the Coerver kid will have to go upstairs and write an essay or read a book. Time spent not playing football.
Unopposed technical practices are a great addition to playing and training. Perhaps dedicate the first ten minutes of the session to it. If you have two or three sessions per week with your young players, maybe you can devote more time to it. If you're a kid lucky enough to have access to a park or a back garden, go out there and practise it. YouTube is a great resource for the young footballer. They can also help a lot even at older ages. I've said many times how much I improved as a player when I began learning how to coach this stuff.
Now to analyse each of the sessions above and see what the players actually get out of them. For reference, we will use the FA Four Corner Model, which looks like this.
With this I like to include three other factors.
Transition; does the other team actually have anything to do when they get the ball or does the game just stop? Typical pub team style attack v defence training. The attackers try to score, and when the defence steal it, the game stops and we go back to the halfway line.
Switch: is there the opportunity to switch the play? To change the point of the attack? To tilt or unbalance the opposition with a horizontal or diagonal pass?
Competitive: is it actually competitive? Do BOTH teams have a means of scoring points? If they don't, then one team won't try as hard. What's the point? It can also come down to the coach and the challenges that are set, or how the teams are picked. For a weak team versus a strong team, very soon both will lose interest as the competitive element becomes non-existent.
For the Coerver drill, just the girl on her own with a ball, it scores high on technical and repetition. It doesn't get full marks for technical because we'd like her to be able to do it in a game, or against somebody. It's very repetitive as it's the same skills over and over, and there are no breaks, waiting, or sharing. It manages a little for psychological because it will create mental toughness in the right players. A player that truly wants to improve and work hard here will persevere through the boredom. It's not competitive because there is no opponent, so your opponent becomes your previous score (psychological). It also scores a bit on the physical side as these repetitions will be working on her agility, balance, and coordination. This strengthens the muscles and the joints as they are always being used, and will have the heart pumping. There's not much in the way of stamina or acceleration, which is why physical is still quite low. And there is no hidden curriculum for this drill. She is exclusively working on the skills listed.
________________________________________________________________________________
Within the Nike Academy drill, this again scores high for technical development and repetition. It's the same few components executed again and again, although now the player is working with others, there will be slight variations in the passes coming to him. This is not exact repetitions like a weights machine at the gym, because some passes will be harder, higher, further from the player. It does what it says on the tin though. The player in the middle is working on his passing and receiving, quite clearly. If they rotate and take turns, each player will spend 25% of the time in the middle. The rest of the time they will be the server. This still works the passing, but not as much as being in the middle. There's no opposition, the picture never changes, and the player has no decisions to make, so there is nothing tactical happening. It's more physically demanding than the previous drill, and with teammates now out there, it does become a little social. Psychologically, this drill is not challenging, and will be incredibly boring. If you can still operate at 100% despite making the same unopposed pass one hundred times, you will improve your concentration and resilience. Two words that anecdotally are known to be important for success in the Premier League. There's a tad more realism as the player is working off of a get-it give-it instruction, and has to move to find a passing lane. It's not competitive, there are no transitions, and no ability to switch the play. There's not really anything else happening here the player would be unaware of that could go into the hidden curriculum.
________________________________________________________________________________
This Barcelona rondo is quite high on the technical side if you are looking at one touch passing in congested areas. There are certainly plenty of repetitions. There is a small tactical element as we're now looking at a split, and will be deciding when to play a first, second, or third line pass. It's still low on the psychological because it doesn't really push anyone emotionally nor does it require a great range of decisions to be made. The decisions have to be quick, but are limited in variety. Any transition is immediately followed by the exercise stopping. There is competition, and the actions of the defenders do impact the decisions of the players on the ball, though the defenders are so outmatched. There's plenty of repetition involved, and the picture does change, adding more realism, but this is only a little, due to the overload, restricted space, and lack of possible outcomes.
________________________________________________________________________________
This is still a rondo, and a lot of the previous remarks apply, but with one key difference. There is a third defender. The players also appear to be taking more touches, and there is perhaps more movement, but for me it's the third defender that makes the pressure, cover, balance a lot more realistic. That balance and compactness that can be provided means that the passing decisions become more complex. It's still annoying that the exercise stops when the ball is won. I give the defenders a task, even if it is something simple like trying to keep the ball or dribble out of the box when they intercept the pass. I've said it before but it's just bad practise to build the habit of stopping when you lose the ball. Games are won and lost by which team responds best to transitions. We are what we repeatedly do, and we get good at what we do in practice. If you practise stopping when you lose the ball, you'll be very good at doing that in games. It's a bit more physical in this exercise as players are working harder to find passing lanes to support their teammates. The repetition is going down as now there are eleven players and only one football, but this adds to the realism.
________________________________________________________________________________
Suddenly we have two teams competing equally, and a goal. There's attack, defence, transitions, and a whole range of decisions to make that are impacted by the numbers, space, distances, and angles, including shooting, dribbling, tackling, passing, movement, defending etc. Remember the hidden curriculum? It's a shooting drill that includes so much more than shooting. Repetition is still high because plenty of shots are coming, and the realism is increasing now that there are more decisions. It's clearly demanding physically due to the intensity and tempo. I mentioned before that it was coach centred and based around one goal when it would be easy to incorporate a second. As it is, we're now getting much closer to a proper game of football, and we see that the bars are beginning to level off. The exercise is focussed around a specific component of football, shooting, but includes enough of everything else that it has become quite generic. Generic enough to teach a whole variety of topics. I'm just going to mention one more time that chucking a goal in where the coach is stood, and playing 3v3 with wall passers, with both teams attacking and defending a separate goal would give it a much higher score on the realism.
________________________________________________________________________________
At full width and about two thirds length, we've now got something that is about 60-70% the real thing. This is almost a proper game of football. Each player is going to get a lot less touches, and as it is not manipulated in anyway to force certain outcomes, this cannot be a technical session. If we wanted to work on the shooting of the two strikers from outside the box, realistically they're achieving about two shots each in twenty minutes. This type of session is a phase of play. The coach in the video was working on defending from the front, so essentially where and when to press or organise when possession is lost in the attacking third. The game will play as normal. Then, when there are specific pictures or mistakes that the coach wants to address, he will step in and give instructions, move players around, and aid understanding of the specific tactic he wishes to improve. As we're playing in only two thirds of the pitch, it's quite likely that the blue team will lose the ball plenty of times in the attacking third. How they respond, whether it's a counter-press, whether they target one specific player, let the opposition have the ball in certain areas, or drop to organise, will depend on the team's strategy. Although the blues will likely lose possession plenty of times, thus turning attack into defence, few situations will be the same. There will be similarities, but due to the randomness of football, and the amount of variables to consider in a phase of play, the same exact situation will not happen twice. It's competitive enough as the yellows need to score in the end zone. And as this type of exercise is usually used with more mature teams and players, they will have longer attention spans and more narrow focus, keeping intensity real. Many players hate these exercises when coaches spend too long in there making points. Go in, pausing for no more than thirty seconds, get out.
________________________________________________________________________________
Finally we have a full match. Not many players actually enjoy this in training. They prefer 7v7 games. There's not enough touches on the ball, and too long between each time they are involved. That's why repetition and technical score so low. 11v11 football is pretty much a tactical exposition. How do we best utilise our eleven versus your eleven? When working with another coach, I have always tried to make it as competitive as possible, by having challenges, half time, and encouraging players to make their own decisions in relation to what we want to achieve in the game. Both teams have a goal, the ball can be switched, there will be many transitions. It's as real as you can get, just in bibs rather than your match kit (which actually does have an effect).
________________________________________________________________________________
Now with these factors in mind when planning sessions, we can move forward. It is important, at any level, to create a learning environment. To not do so is simply irresponsible. Yes, I mean even with top level senior players. Just because you're good or old doesn't mean you can't become better. Once you get to the top, you need to adapt to stay on top. What got you here, won't get you there (great book). Ever seen a team and reckoned they just seem stale or lacking ideas? It happens in all sorts of organisations. They're not pulling in the same direction, and they're not striving for better. The players don't necessarily feel valued or empowered, or can feel demotivated. We all work best when we truly believe in what it is we're doing, and with that comes a vested interest. If the players are still on a journey of self-improvement and discovery, that will directly impact how hard they train, and how receptive they are to new ideas. The best teams don't just stay good, they get better.
Reading about Guardiola at Bayern, he worked with players that were already hugely successful. Many have reported how much more they have learnt and developed as players for working under him. The journey as a player is never complete, and it is our responsibility as coaches to instil this hunger for learning in them. Considering all the factors that have been discussed so far, there's two more that I would add to it that are incredibly important for creating a learning environment:
Question and answer - Ask questions to your players to check for understanding, and even pose some theoretical questions. What would happen if? What could you do next? How would this affect the defender? Which is the bigger danger? It gets them thinking and analysing. Kids love to show what they can do and what they know. It also gives you the coach an idea of whether they have a clue what you're on about.
Incentivisation - More of a novice mistake, and something that is still fairly prominent among the old school thinkers, we forget to give an incentive to everyone involved. Always keep in mind the hidden curriculum, and consider would you actually enjoy or understand the task if you were a player. If we're working on an attacking topic, what the defenders have to do must still be realistic, relevant, challenging, and interesting. Never should it be just stop the attack and then restart the exercise. That transitional element is so important, and without it, the practice is largely useless. Counter-attack is massive, and should be allowed to be cultivated. If the defenders win it, can they begin an attack? Whether it be to dribble, hit a target, score a goal, go to an end zone etc.
Don't just teach your players the thing, teach them to do the thing in the context of the other things. The context depends on their age, ability, and understanding. Football is not just a strict set of motor skills that operate in isolation. Coerver and other skill programmes are brilliant, and kids should be out with a ball every day gaining thousands of touches. Even keep-ups or ball against a wall, just gaining those touches, working on the agility, balance, and coordination. They should also be playing all sorts of games, be it at the park or at school, as well as with their team. And just football? Absolutely not. Other team and individual sports. Invasion games, athletics, endurance, racket sports. Be in a place where you're the best, be in a place where you're the worst, be in a place where you're average. Play for good teams and bad teams. Aggressive coaches and passive coaches. Gain a whole range of experiences that provide a multitude of successes and failures. All of this will be compartmentalised by the child, and will help them become a well rounded adult, as well as a competent athlete.
Don't worry so much about trying to make it fun. Giving them a challenge and a way to compete will do that for you. And there will be times it has to be boring. Pattern drills and the like are sometimes a necessary evil because either they are the most effective way to get across that specific point, or the coach just cannot fathom to do it a better way. That's the coach's equivalent of a trivela; hitting it with the outside of your strong foot because you can't kick with your weak foot. Fair enough. As long as it gets the job done. We owe it to our players to give them the best that we can give. That comes from constantly striving to touch upon all the relevant areas, but as we've seen, as you gain more of one factor, you sacrifice another area.
Some like to say "let the game be the teacher", which is relatively vague. Some interpret it as a hippy slogan that means let the kids do what they want. That's irresponsible. What it really means is don't worry so much about chucking tons of information at the players. Instead, come up with a game, one that hits all the aforementioned areas, with rules, areas, challenges etc. that manipulate certain outcomes. Now as the coach, you're not forcing yourself upon them. The repetitions you wish for the players to experience are occurring naturally within the session simply due to the session design. That frees up your cognitive processing to focus more on what the players are actually doing, rather than how to get them to do what you want. You are free to coach, instruct, guide, ask, and challenge. It also aids reflection from the players. Design the session so that the session can be the teacher. It becomes like a video game you have crafted to challenge specific areas of their skill arsenal. You then monitor their progress and step in when necessary.
Finally, remember, no laps, no lines, no lectures. We're here to serve our players. Give them something that they will enjoy, that will challenge them, and that will help them work on what's needed. We don't score extra points for amount of cones. Use games to aid their understanding of football.
No comments:
Post a Comment