CSNbbs

Full Version: One touch Soccer and Coaching
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Ok, I coach a couple of rec soccer teams and make my best effort to understand what I should be teaching the kids - 6 and 10 in my case.

I've seen at least two posters make the case that if kids aren't brought up playing "one touch" by age 14 that they are rendered forever damaged and unable to play the modern game.

Yet everything that I have read or heard talking to other (better) coaches indicates the exact opposite. Namely that through the age of 10 or so, kids aren't really capable of really being "team" oriented players and that they should focus on ball control and dribbling first and foremost. In my experience, the kids will learn to pass on their own without a lot of encouragement if they are playing with players of similar capabilities.

What I would like to hear is for some of the more knowledgeable and experienced folks here to make their case.

First, I think we need to define some terms ... when I hear "one touch", I really think of European style professional play. I think every coach I've ever read or talked to understands the importance of a good first touch, whether that leads to a pass, shot, or dribble.

The idea that one touch must be taught from an early age doesn't resonate with my by virtue of the fact that Brazillians and Africans are so dominant in the top European leagues. Certainly I think some Brazilian players (Kaka) are products great academies, but it seems to me that others that come out of street play are capable of being great professionals in the modern game, and I don't think those players are taught European one-touch from an early age.

I don't want to come off as argumentative - I'm really looking for advice. It's just that the assertions I've seen made about playing one touch don't make sense to me. IMHO, it seems if players have a good sense of touch and good control of the ball that they can easily adapt into "one touch" players. I think it's easier to learn the sense of the field that they need as adults than it is to learn the touch and skills at that point, granting that this could be a false dichotomy. But, there is only so much practice time that you have with kids at a young age.

I should mention that one touch play was very limited when I grew up, and I never had the level of coaching when I was a kid that is available from today's academies.
(08-15-2010 07:39 PM)I45owl Wrote: [ -> ]The idea that one touch must be taught from an early age doesn't resonate with my by virtue of the fact that Brazillians and Africans are so dominant in the top European leagues. Certainly I think some Brazilian players (Kaka) are products great academies, but it seems to me that others that come out of street play are capable of being great professionals in the modern game, and I don't think those players are taught European one-touch from an early age.

I don't consider myself to know much about coaching, but I recall a recent article backing up what you've stated in that paragraph. In a nutshell, the author said the US has it backwards when it comes to development. We dump all sorts of money to get our kids on the best travel teams at an early age, put them in camps, etc. However, many of the top players are coming from impoverished backgrounds, basically learning the game by kicking something that's pretty close to round on a makeshift pitch.

Not much useful here, I know. If I get a chance to find the article, I'll be sure to link it.
(08-15-2010 08:16 PM)GRPunk Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-15-2010 07:39 PM)I45owl Wrote: [ -> ]The idea that one touch must be taught from an early age doesn't resonate with my by virtue of the fact that Brazillians and Africans are so dominant in the top European leagues. Certainly I think some Brazilian players (Kaka) are products great academies, but it seems to me that others that come out of street play are capable of being great professionals in the modern game, and I don't think those players are taught European one-touch from an early age.

I don't consider myself to know much about coaching, but I recall a recent article backing up what you've stated in that paragraph. In a nutshell, the author said the US has it backwards when it comes to development. We dump all sorts of money to get our kids on the best travel teams at an early age, put them in camps, etc. However, many of the top players are coming from impoverished backgrounds, basically learning the game by kicking something that's pretty close to round on a makeshift pitch.

Not much useful here, I know. If I get a chance to find the article, I'll be sure to link it.

Could it have been one of these? I posted them a few weeks back.

THIS piece from the New York Times details the Ajax youth academy and explains a lot about soccer youth development as a whole. Very good read, highly recommended.

THIS story from ESPN talks about the MLS academies and some of the problems youth development faces in the US.
This is the one I was thinking of from Klinsmann...

http://www.dailysoccerfix.com/2010/7/2/1...-s-soccers

"This is the only country in the world that has the pyramid upside down. You pay for having your kid play soccer," he said. "Because your goal is not to have your kid become a professional soccer player, your goal is that your kid gets a scholarship in college, which is complete opposite rest of the world."
(08-16-2010 07:26 AM)GRPunk Wrote: [ -> ]This is the one I was thinking of from Klinsmann...

http://www.dailysoccerfix.com/2010/7/2/1...-s-soccers

"This is the only country in the world that has the pyramid upside down. You pay for having your kid play soccer," he said. "Because your goal is not to have your kid become a professional soccer player, your goal is that your kid gets a scholarship in college, which is complete opposite rest of the world."

Well, there's that. If you took the money that parents paid to try to get their kids scholarships and instead just paid for school to begin with, I'm pretty sure they'd well outweigh the scholarship money. I think in many cases it's about prestige moreso than taking the cheap route.
(08-16-2010 07:46 AM)I45owl Wrote: [ -> ]
(08-16-2010 07:26 AM)GRPunk Wrote: [ -> ]This is the one I was thinking of from Klinsmann...

http://www.dailysoccerfix.com/2010/7/2/1...-s-soccers

"This is the only country in the world that has the pyramid upside down. You pay for having your kid play soccer," he said. "Because your goal is not to have your kid become a professional soccer player, your goal is that your kid gets a scholarship in college, which is complete opposite rest of the world."

Well, there's that. If you took the money that parents paid to try to get their kids scholarships and instead just paid for school to begin with, I'm pretty sure they'd well outweigh the scholarship money. I think in many cases it's about prestige moreso than taking the cheap route.

Agreed.

As for the original question...I think you start with the basics of dribbling, passing, shooting with the little ones and work into the "one touch" as they develop. Like you said, there's little sense trying to work some sort of "give and go" when 8 kids are bound to surround the ball after the inital pass as 5-year olds will do.

Your kids that are getting to be 10 and older should know that passing the ball is a quicker way to get it accross the field than dribbling on their own. Working toward "one touch" is probably more appropriate for a kid that's 10 or 12.
When I think "one touch" I'm thinking that first touch when you receive the ball. That first touch should put you in immediate position to pass, shoot, dribble. What you see from our players is that first touch is so crap they aren't in a position to make a quick pass or shot. Sometimes it is so crap, they have to chase the ball back down.
(08-16-2010 08:54 AM)fsquid Wrote: [ -> ]When I think "one touch" I'm thinking that first touch when you receive the ball. That first touch should put you in immediate position to pass, shoot, dribble. What you see from our players is that first touch is so crap they aren't in a position to make a quick pass or shot. Sometimes it is so crap, they have to chase the ball back down.

That's what I've really suspected in these discussions ... that's what I'd refer to as "first touch". Unfortunately, I haven't done a good job with that with the 10 year olds because I've learned to teach skills as I've gone along.

If you interpret "one touch" the same as what I've called "first touch", then I'm in complete agreement. But, I've lectured my kids for years that I expect them to have at least two touches when the ball comes to them (ironically, to prepare for more advanced control, including how I've defined one-touch). What drives me nuts is coaches that encourage kids (defenders esp) to take wild swings at the ball, which they miss at least 40% of the time in most cases. I'd rather give the ball up at that age trying to control and pass the ball out of the back than to play kickball. I've tried without as much success to instill that in other teams by getting my forwards to run past the defender in expectation of that miss, but they still duck or play defensively more often than not.
If they are behind in skill at 14, they likely will not recover if you are talking about playing at the highest level, which for you I45 is likely the Texans. I have never heard of the concept that they must be able to play one-touch soccer at 14. Coordination is just kicking in. Any coach worth his salt is teaching some elements for future seasons so the concept should be introduced.
Skill, skill, skill. One-touch will never come without it.
Well, I'm certainly not worth my salt, but I try to do it anyways.

Some of what drove me to post this thread are comments like the one I've quoted below. There was another thread that focused on clubs in the Memphis area, but I don't remember who the poster was, so I don't know how to find the post.

The comment below is "touch", which I'd equate to first touch. I wish I had captured this in a youtube clip or something, but I remember one Gold Cup game against Honduras or Guatemala (I think Honduras) where the opposing player received a pass from overhead at about 30 yards, hit it about 5 times in stride without the ball ever touching the ground (thigh, chest, foot or some such sequence). I thought that was about the best example of touch I can recall in handling the ball on a long/intermediate pass.

I'd actually like to hear randaddy's and Graybeard's thoughts on this since I think they're pretty well plugged in to modern youth development.

(07-24-2010 01:46 AM)randaddyminer Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-24-2010 12:59 AM)aTxTIGER Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-24-2010 12:26 AM)randaddyminer Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-18-2010 11:38 PM)I45owl Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-18-2010 02:31 PM)jgardne Wrote: [ -> ]Bradley made some costly mistakes that probably ended up in our losing to Ghana. Starting ricardo clark over edu was indefensible and made no sense. Contuing to put findley up top when he'd produced nothing over 3 games instead of starting feilhaber was also a horrendous choice. He also probably should've stuck with onyewu in the center who, though not fully fit, wouldn't have let gyan get off that first shot like demerit and bocanegra did. Of course, if he hadn't started clark we never would've given up the first goal anyway, as clark started the breakaway by trying to go 1 on 1 with somebody in the middle of the field with nothing to gain

i was not impressed with his match to match adjustments.

Of course, the real thing the US needs is a finisher like a Klose, who picks up garbage goals and finishes chances. We create a lot but nobody knows what to do when they're one on one with the keeper

I'd agree that a world class closer is the biggest need of this team, but I was frankly disappointed with Onyewu during the cup. I thought he was a shining star out of the confederations cup last year, but I don't think the problem was entirely fitness. I believe one of the biggest problems that the US had was allowing the opposition to set up shots with the ball free from about 25 yards. No-one - including Onyewu - was closing space with them to prevent their shots. At least one of the preliminary round goals went right past Onyewu who stood to block the ball rather than closing in to the forward. For that reason, I guess I'm more sympathetic to Bradley ... but, I frankly haven't kept tabs on the strength and weaknesses of individual defenders. I was very very disappointed when Onyewu went down last year.

I agree never really have liked gooch. He is a physical player, but is dumb as a rock on the field. If you look at previous matches before his injury he did the same thing, lets his player continue on runs and just floats nonchalantly towards the are of the ball, I'm sorry but that is something that U10 players do. The one thing he has improved on are those stupid fouls he gives in the defending third 04-chairshot

Whomever we get, I hope he plays a more attacking style and more one touch... damn it is frustrating watching a player every time make a touch and then pass it to a guy whom is less than 15 yards away.

It's hard to teach touch to adult players who don't already possess it. You need to get them young on that.

Wow that is hard to believe that players at that level have not played one touch.
Reference URL's