Coaching content provided by US Youth Soccer's Coaching Connection

COACHING IN THE USA -- PART I
Are Traditional Coaching Methods Appropriate for Soccer?

By Rod Thorpe

As an Englishman looking at ‘traditional American sports’, as purveyed on the television, I am immediately struck by the nature of the games and the input of the coaches. Football (gridiron), baseball and basketball are all characterized by stoppages, particularly at key stages, at which point the coach can provide direction and advice. Moves, strategies, tactical formations, individual player instructions can all be called by the coach, particular when the game allows substitutes to leave the game and then re-enter. Soccer is not like that – a coach can affect the game at half time, by the introduction of a substitute (but remember once a player is off the field they stay off) and, to some small degree, by shouts from the sideline or perhaps during an injury stoppage. But, play is on-going for 45 minutes; a shouted instruction, if heard, can often be misinterpreted.

Simply, it leads me to the conclusion that a major role for the coach of soccer, more so than most other games, is to give the players the confidence to recognize patterns of play, to make decisions for themselves, etc. It is my opinion that a coach who is too directive does not allow these qualities to appear. (You will see later that I do not believe the coach as director is the best way to develop players for any sport).

It would be quite wrong to suggest that all coaches of the ‘traditional’ USA sports are didactic (very directing/controlling); there are many documented examples of coaches who seek to develop players more broadly, it is just that the image of the coach often observed, not least by the parent, is the vocal, sometimes emotive, “director”. This is important to understand, because should coaches feel it is inappropriate to coach in this very didactic way for most situations, as I do, and fail to explain why they are not quite so active, why they are not telling their child exactly what they are doing wrong and what they should be doing, the parent will view this as a poor learning environment. I will present the case it might be the very opposite.

I would add that I think the attributes of perception and decision making, so important in soccer, take as much time to develop as the technical skills and hence it is the coach of the young player who has a responsibility to develop these aspects as well as the technical.

If, like me, you hold the opinion that it is our responsibility to ‘empower’ players to learn for themselves as part of the process of developing the whole person (a legacy from my Physical Education Teacher days), traditional coaching methods do not always fit. Interestingly, many coaches are now looking at empowering players, not for ethical reasons, but more because they realize that to get great performances, we need players who have ‘intrinsic’ motivation (they want to do it for themselves, they are not doing it for the coach, or for money, etc.), and who take responsibility on the field.

If, like the United Kingdom, children are learning their sport in organized sessions run by adults, we should not be surprised that they fail to practice outside these sessions. I think we are in danger of developing people, player and parent alike, who expect the coach to cause the changes in the player. Sorry, it won’t happen. Only the player can make the change – the coach has to be far more aware of how people learn, and match their coaching to the learning challenge.

It is interesting to note that to play soccer, all you need is a ball, 3 or 4 friends, a bit of space and something to put down as a goal. To travel in some of the poorer countries of the world is to reveal every patch of ground has youngsters playing soccer, with no sophisticated equipment and no coach. I became a reasonable soccer player and I never had a lesson in my life (I used to practice, shooting, passing, keepie/uppie {juggling} for hours because I loved the game); perhaps if I had had a coach who encouraged this ‘play’ but added some key advice, gave me interesting challenging games and practices, etc, I would have been a great player.

It is often the case, particularly with the talented, that a young player watches a ‘hero’ or a slightly older player do something and immediately copies it – if the coach then steps in using words, breaking the skill down, often the fluidity of the movement just revealed disappears. The role of the coach with this sort of player is to ensure the player can see the role model at the right time (s/he is ready to move to this level – judging readiness is the greatest, perhaps the hardest, skill of coaching) and has the facility to practice.

The key here is to encourage learning to occur and this may be by structuring the learning environment and then stepping back. This example illustrates why it is important for coaches to talk to parents – to explain that most people learn best by observational learning and that this does not always mean an ‘obvious demonstration’; it can be incidental by playing with other youngsters who have the skills. Explain why a little game of practice may be structured to include particular children. Good coaching is usually more about structuring a session than barking out information.

To be continued in the February 2007 issue of the Cal South E-News.

Editor’s note: John Bluem is men’s coach at Ohio State University and a member of the NSCAA National Academy staff. He is the men’s college representative on the NSCAA Board of Directors.