Coaching For The Brave

Over the years football has become more and more commercial. At its highest levels the game is now so professional and scientific it bears little resemblance to that played just a generation ago.




This has brought great benefits for players, supporters and TV audiences around the world.

A whole industry has erupted to support the game, spawning Directors of Football, Sports Psychologists, Performance Analysts and even Sleep Advisers. Clubs have poured millions into Elite Academies for those identified as having a chance of reaching the top and reaping the rewards. Young Starlets that graduate from these Centres of Excellence are paid thousands of pounds per week despite never having done anything of merit in the game.

Coaches are trained and can't wait to get into the talent factories as a "first step on the rung" to a dream full time job with a club.

Kids as young as nine and ten have a Golden ticket dangled in front of them and doting, eager parents hapilly take them away from their youth clubs to leave playing with friends behind.

YouTube and Twitter become engorged with professional training sessions. Barca this and Real that. Rondo this and Drill that.

Still, the improvements are all worthwhile and we can all easily accept it's for the better.

But then, as time goes on, it inevitably starts to trickle down. Not just to lower league clubs or non league clubs but Grassroots Youth Clubs. You know, the club down your road or in your village.

The clubs that take in 5,6 and 7 year olds with a promise of a game of football every week.

The volunteer coaches inside these clubs can't help but think "should I be doing more?", "How can I improve my players?".

They go from volunteering to "what do I do now?" in the blink of a preseason. Looking around they see fellow volunteers obsessed with making their new 7 year olds better than his 7 year olds.

This drives a never ending cycle of Develop at all Costs. The less aggressive sibling of Win at all Costs.

Kids up and down the country are eagerly introduced to football by volunteers with limited qualifications who have fallen into the trap of believing football is just a learning experience. "I must teach them this, I must teach them that".

Winning is simply replaced by Developing.

A noble replacement but one that is still based largely on what an adult wants and not what a child wants.

Compare today's Youth football with that of a, possibly rose tinted, generation ago. Children still loved football, infact they possibly loved it more. There was far less competition in the way of computer games. They still started to play the game early but their introduction would have been completely different.





Initially it would be a sibling who'd start kicking a ball around with them or a friend from a couple of doors down. Then they'd continue in the school yard with kids of similar but not always the same age.

If they were lucky they may get some school games but probably not until 11 or 12.

Then, if excited enough and seen to be good enough they may get asked to join a Club.

However, even in these clubs, not everyone was lucky to be able to "train" as well as play a game every week. Crucially, if they did "train" it looked nothing like what you'd see today.

Regardless of this, most kids experienced the game on the streets. Adapting the 11 aside that parents insist on today to smaller games that could be played with varying numbers of mates.

What does this have to do with the coach of today?

I believe coaches can and should be less concerned with learning during their sessions for young children.

I believe coaches should be confident enough to let the kids get on with it.



Class of 92

As an example let's take a look at one of the most decorated group of players in the modern game. The famed Class of '92.

We will have heard about Scholes, Butt and the Nevilles and seen how they went from Youth Cup winners to multiple Premier league and Champions League winners.

Surely they must have been coached from an early age with Rondos and Positional Play?

Surely they must have had well meaning coaches with learning objectives and session plans?




Actually, that's not true at all.

My friend and next door neighbour was a lad called Glynn Buckley. Glynn played in the same Youth team that Scholes, Butt and the Nevilles did. Boundary Park Juniors.

I've talked to him numerous times about his football education and he never mentions anything that resembles coaching as we'd see it today.

Glynn lived next door but one to me and every day he'd be in the cul de sac playing 3 and in, Wembley, 60 seconds and maybe a 2v2 with me and our brothers.

Rain, wind, snow, it didn't matter. He'd be out with his ball. If he couldn't find others he didn't care. The ball was enough.

He did this day in, day out for years.

He was in the last year of Primary School before he ever had anyone even organise after-school games for him. I know, because that was me. His school asked for PE assistance when I was at college. We had an afternoon a week to do extra curricular activities and I chose to help in local schools.

Glynn and his school mates had never had anyone who could help them with football and I just turned up, organised 5 aside and encouraged them were I could.

Glynn's first real taste of organised football came at his next school where he started playing 11 aside against other schools.

His football teacher was Mr Wilson an RE teacher who also played in the same amateur team that I did.

Mr Wilson's coaching consisted of this:

10 minutes of static stretches
12 minute run around athletics track
5 aside round robins for whatever time was left. ( we need to return to these games )

Again, does this look like anything you'd see at a training session today? I doubt it very much.

So, at the age of 12,  Glynn had been subjected to zero coaching as we would know it. None.

He was left on his own to explore and fall in love with the game.

Here's the weird bit:

Boundary Park Juniors were a very ambitious football club. Each year they would scour the local schools for the best footballers they could find and bring them together.

How else would the Nevilles, from Bury and Glynn from Rochdale end up playing with Scholes from Oldham in a team based in Oldham?

In effect they acted like academies do now. Attracting the best talent and bringing them together as a great team.

Surely this is where Glynn and the rest of them were coached and developed into the players they'd end up as?



Well according to Glynn, NO.

Training was a bit of running and loads of small games. Bit of a theme cropping up here.

Yes they had coaches demanding certain things of them and challenging them but no formalised "today we are learning this."

In fact he's clear that his team mates would have hated this approach and tended to get the best out of each other by setting their own standards.

As promised, let me circle back to these small games.

These weren't tame affairs. Honestly, they were brutal. I doubt that they would be tolerated in today's climate.

Nowhere to hide, fast, intimidating and super competitive.

These games are the one thing that no present day session can offer. No drill, rondo or whole part whole can replicate the primal experience that these games do. So much so that academies around the world are turning to forms of Street Football and Cage Football to try to imitate these hotbeds of peer pressure.

The better the players the better the games were but even at less rarified heights of talent they were awesome. Just watching and anticipating your turn would be enough to enhance your development like no coach ever could.

You'd be watching, waiting, plotting and getting pumped ready to knock "Winner Stays On" off their perch.

Watch kids 5 aside now. The comparison is night and day.

Boundary Park were so good they were eventually asked to leave their league. This is when the local professional clubs became interested.

Glynn and my other mate John didn't make it at United and ended up playing in my amateur team which Glynn later left to play Rugby league. ( A sport he'd never really played until 22).

None of this is mentioned to denigrate how things are today but to simply demonstrate that if you want, if you're confident enough, you can run youth football training sessions differently and still know it's not harming their development.

If one of the greatest groups of players ever assembled managed to get there with minimal, if any, formal coaching then I believe it's ok to let little Johnny and Jenny explore and take their own time.

In fact, I could easily argue that it's the insistence on formalised coaching that inhibits the growth of some players and leads to boredom and dropout...but I'm not going to.

So, what can that well meaning, volunteer coach do about all this?

Well, first of all, you need to feel confident enough to do whatever you feel most comfortable with and don't be afraid to watch that evolve.

Don't be wedded to any one method. They are kids and it's actually not that big a deal.

Football is a wide spectrum and can accommodate many differing styles and ways of coaching.

Find something that suits you, something that you can be true to and enjoy.

You'll need to be confident though because you'll probably get questioned by parents, other coaches or if you're like me, YOURSELF.

I've spent months trying to work out how to describe my coaching style, which Pedagogy it lines up with and how I try help kids learn the game.

What I learnt was that I was asking the wrong question.



 The real question is "what do I want to offer the kids?"

Once I asked this question the rest seemed to dissolve away.

What I wanted to offer the kids was a kind of free range exploration of the game. Something that I myself felt I'd benefited from and was largely missing from the coaching landscape.

I'd have loved my Level One course to have been  "Hey, calm down, don't sweat it they're 7!"

It was all about DNA, session plans and learning objectives. All fine but not exactly what attracts a kid to a ball.

Recently those very same coach developers have all told me that just playing loads of footy is pretty much all that's needed at that age.

What a missed opportunity.

Pretty much every coach I know laments the fact that kids don't play enough football these days. Lots of esteemed professionals insist that whatever the age they joined a club, they learned the game on the streets. No coaches, just hothouses of bliss and competition.




If we truly believe this, why is it that when we have the opportunity to let them play we break it up into a session with a learning objective and possibly a big game if they behave well?

Why not give them what they crave?

Give them what we feel they don't do enough?

Give them what Cryuff, Bergkamp and so many others insist is what formed their game?

Be brave, think about what you want to offer. Have confidence because at some point, you or someone else will ask "are the kids really learning?"

This is were you can really undermine yourself but here's what you need to remember:

There's no rush. Just because you may have a game on Saturday doesn't mean your kids need to play like Barca... by Saturday.

If you feel confident enough to place the enjoyment of just playing above learning the intricacies of the game you'll start to see Saturday differently. It becomes less about applying your well taught lessons and more about kids finding ways to solve problems while having a brilliant time.

Everyone seems to agree that kids can, and do learn in lots of ways. Direct instruction, Guided Discovery and immersive exploration are all different ways that kids can find out about the game and what they can bring to it.

Aren't you tired of trying to build the next Messi? Why not find out what it is that your kids will bring to the game. 

I want them to be the next Johnny or Jenny not the next Messi. He's been done!

At some point, a parent is going to ask "what's going on? I can't see any coaching!"

Be brave, tell them what you're doing and why. They can choose to go elsewhere. That's up to them. Tell them about the Class of 92. Tell them about Glynn.






Just don't feel you have to bow to their opinions.

Each approach has its benefits and costs and none is better or worse. I've yet to find an academic who will insist they've found the answer so be open minded, put the kids first and think about what YOU want to offer.

If that has to be a rondo then fine. If it has to be Englands DNA then fine but guess what, it can also be none of those. It can just be turn up, play for an hour and go home with a great big smile.

If you decide that the above resonates with you, here are a bunch of ideas that will keep the kids and yourself happy without their football having to be about lessons.









Firstly, I'd urge you to take a look at @salisburyrovers.

This club decided that it wanted to offer a different football experience for it's kids

They believed that the race to get kids into kits, in teams, in leagues drives a lot of behaviours that kids shouldn't need to experience when playing football.

So they left the league so they could truly control their football environment.

Less explicit teaching and coaching and more fun and child appropriate games.

It's a shinning beacon of what can be achieved if you just think outside the normal. Think what could be possible if you step outside the given format?

This however may be a step too far. You may not be able to do this so just think about your sessions.



This is where I start:

"Why will a series of games not be enough for them tonight?"

If I can't find a bloody good reason then that's where I stick. This doesn't mean a simple 8v8 or however many turn up. But a series of differing formats the will give the kids exactly what they want from the first minute they arrive and drives the competition that challenges them to find answers in the game.

Here's a few tips:

Is there a goal?
Do the teams always have to be equal in numbers or quality of player?
Is there a keeper?
Is there a scoring system?
Can the game be adapted on the fly if need be?
Can I devise a tournament or round robin?

The games that kids used to create on the streets would all look similar to the above. For example the best form of 1v1 development is still a game of 3 and In. No coach required.

There are loads of resources that explain these street games but my favourites are:

3 and In
60 seconds
Headers and volleys
Panna
Wembley or Cuppy doubles.
Footvolley
Squarey

Let the kids pick. They'll thank you!

For those wanting more structure so that you can fool the parents and look like there's loads going on, I'd suggest getting hold of the following books:

Weeks and weeks of small sided games with differing themes. It really doesn't need to be more complicated than this.

Finally, for those of you who want an Ultimate Guide I'd suggest getting Horst Weins book.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0736069488/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=paulgoodwin-21&camp=1634&creative=6738&linkCode=as2&creativeASIN=0736069488&linkId=5f6f8b4a1c0dca5ffb3c2d92634ee0b2


This will give you everything you need to ensure the kids are playing, having fun, competing and getting better.

Taking this route is not easy. You'll need to be brave.

Go on, I dare you...

Be brave.