In a recent soccer coaching forum, there is a post titled Why do we give our players only one weapon - one method of play? And, what should we do about it? I’ve seen this myself, both as a coach of a girls U17 club team and as a referee. In my case the typical attacking method for teams is to put tall, fast gazelles as forwards who wait for a ball to be served over the top so they can beat the fullbacks, run onto the ball and shoot. We played a team several weeks ago who had one forward with exceptional speed but, fortunately for us, had poor shooting skill. Almost all of her shots were wide or high. I assigned my fastest back to mark her which took her out of the picture. The opponent had no Plan B. We also played in a tournament over the weekend. All three of the teams we played used the same approach. I don’t think I saw one attempt to build up an attack out of the back.
The team I work with also has at least one speedy forward who can easily beat defenses but I’ve been working with them on alternate attacking patterns in case an opponent neutralizes our forward. We’ve been working on diagonal through balls, crosses, bent and curved runs that frame the goal, etc.
This thread confirms my observations that the U.S. approach depends too much on speed and size over technical build up.
No comments:
Post a Comment