FA Youth Review: 12 New Rules

[Lovejoy]

In other words, the game has gone. This won't exactly address the problem we have bringing players through. Might as well ban goal scoring so no one can lose.

[AKCJ]

Some of the rules are ****ing ridiculous.

 

"Power Play Rule" - Utterly humiliating.

"All Positions Rule" - What on Earth is the point?

"No Instructions Rule" -  Is this a wind up?

"No Slide Tackle Rule" - It's a contact sport.

 

There are 4 rules on safety and only 2 on skill and in 20 years time we'll wonder why we still can't beat anyone.

[lgfualol]

I feel violent after reading those

[TiffToff88]

As a coach, i think all the "Faster Development" rules in orange are absolutely crazy

 

EDIT: In fairnesss, the equal playing time rule for younger players works

[Captain...]

Hmm, what age group and level is this aimed at?

 

I think there is the start of a good idea in there but I don't think I totally agree with the execution.

 

Anything that gets players thinking for themselves and working on skills rather than just winning games by being the bigger stronger team is a good thing, team work is important which includes utilising weaker members of the team/squad effectively, and having players playing in all positions is a good idea that is used in other countries.

 

I don't agree with a no slide tackle rule, the slide tackle is an important skill as is knowing how to avoid being tackled, and should be part of their development, but any slightly mistimed tackle should be punished harshly, as should cynical/professional fouls and time wasting.

 

The biggest mistake is having the silent sideline rule as the first rule, the rest have some sense to them, but that is just a WTF is this shit from the start, and then you read the rest with your opinion already clouded by the first rule.

[StanSP]

they can't be real, surely?! 

That is so embarrassing. How will stuff like that aid 'faster development'?!

[davieG]

Surely a lot of this is just for the training ground?

[TiffToff88]

Also, mixed teams rules wont work. lots of kids with lower ability love playing, but hate playing with players much higher than their own ability level. A and B teams are more enjoyable for everyone involved

[Captain...]

9 minutes ago, StanSP said:

they can't be real, surely?! 

That is so embarrassing. How will stuff like that aid 'faster development'?!

Because kids will have to think for themselves, rather than be shouted into position. No game situation is the same and they need to learn when to go forwards, when to drop back and how to read the game themselves. There was an interesting debate about how English players lack footballing intelligence and are all very robotic, they learn one position rote and don't deviate. That's why you end up with a national team with no flair or individualism, they are all just going through the motions waiting for someone else to make something happen.

 

They also need to adapt to team mates strengths and weaknesses in different positions, if you have a really good big strong target man you learn how to get the ball wide and whip a cross in, but doing that all game doesn't really aid development. Make the big  man play wide, stick the little guy in the middle and see how they adapt.

[Captain...]

Just now, TiffToff88 said:

Also, mixed teams rules wont work. lots of kids with lower ability love playing, but hate playing with players much higher than their own ability level. A and B teams are more enjoyable for everyone involved

Disagree, everyone loves a close competitive match, if both teams are of mixed ability you get closer games and weaker players get to play against and with better players and improve. We are looking at development here and there is  so much time to develop, but we are quick pigeon holing kids as a B team left back before they have really come close to reaching their potential. If you have ability ranked teams and end up in the B team then when you get your chance in the A team you are completely overawed because you haven't played with these players before nor come up against the quality of players before.

 

That makes perfect sense to me, up to a level of course.

 

 

[Redouane]

No way this is real  If you are 4 goals down, you can have an extra player? Is it april 1st or something??

[StanSP]

7 minutes ago, Captain... said:

Because kids will have to think for themselves, rather be shouted into position. No game situation is the same and they need to learn when to go forwards, when to drop back and how to read the game themselves. There was an interesting debate about how English players lack footballing intelligence and are all very robotic, they learn one position rote and don't deviate. That's why you end up with a national team with no flair or individualism, they are all just going through the motions waiting for someone else to make something happen.

all seems a bit too Draconian to me?

 

Why can't players slide tackle? It's part of the game and something all professional players do. They're surely more likely to make mistakes and bad challenges if there's no opportunity to do them or learn how to do them? To ban it altogether and punish players for it is crazy I think. 

 

The Retreat Line Rule. To an extent I agree with this as it avoids hoof-ball. But to have opposition players retreat? Bit OTT. You get more skilful and be able to think quicker when under pressure. So if a goal-keeper is playing the ball out to his defenders, they have plenty of time on the ball as there's no defenders near him. What about in a match situation when they're older and they have defenders close to them? They'll be unprepared for that kind of situation and needing to cope under that kind of pressure which they wouldn't have learnt due to this 'retreat' rule.

 

Managers not being able to give instructions is unnecessary too. Why not allow both instructions and questions? Outlawing one for the other seems a bit backwards? I'm all for mental agility and improving this for younger players, but there's nothing wrong with giving instructions. 

[Captain...]

2 minutes ago, Redouane said:

No way this is real  If you are 4 goals down, you can have an extra player? Is it april 1st or something??

Why not? In what way does a one-sided game between 2 mismatched teams help anyone develop?

 

Admittedly I would change it so that the winning team goes down to 10, just throwing on an extra player will mess up the formation, whereas 11 vs 10 is a valid scenario and helps both sides develop match skills. 

[davieG]

Some players will never be capable of thinking for themselves and there's some that don't want. They'll still need to be advised and cajoled.

[Redouane]

5 minutes ago, Captain... said:

Why not? In what way does a one-sided game between 2 mismatched teams help anyone develop?

 

Admittedly I would change it so that the winning team goes down to 10, just throwing on an extra player will mess up the formation, whereas 11 vs 10 is a valid scenario and helps both sides develop match skills. 

I hate this "Everybody gets a trophy" mentality. You develop with hard work, trying to be better than everybody else.. not by having unfair advantages.

 

Do you ever get unfair advantages like this in the real world? No, you need to take shit in your face, and use it as motivation to improve. And if you can't, then you aren't made for the cruel world  of football.

[Captain...]

1 minute ago, StanSP said:

all seems a bit too Draconian to me?

 

Why can't players slide tackle? It's part of the game and something all professional players do. They're surely more likely to make mistakes and bad challenges if there's no opportunity to do them or learn how to do them? To ban it altogether and punish players for it is crazy I think. 

 

The Retreat Line Rule. To an extent I agree with this as it avoids hoof-ball. But to have opposition players retreat? Bit OTT. You get more skilful and be able to think quicker when under pressure. So if a goal-keeper is playing the ball out to his defenders, they have plenty of time on the ball as there's no defenders near him. What about in a match situation when they're older and they have defenders close to them? They'll be unprepared for that kind of situation and needing to cope under that kind of pressure which they wouldn't have learnt due to this 'retreat' rule.

 

Managers not being able to give instructions is unnecessary too. Why not allow both instructions and questions? Outlawing one for the other seems a bit backwards? I'm all for mental agility and improving this for younger players, but there's nothing wrong with giving instructions. 

I agree about the slide tackle rule, stupid to ban it as it is a part of the game, both performing a safe tackling and avoiding a slide challenge, although diving in is often the quickest way to lose your man.

 

The retreat line rule I would have to see it in practice, but anything that encourages defenders to actually pass and play football must be a good thing.

 

Questions not instructions, I like the idea of them not having instructions shouted at them, but what questions will be asked and how will it help I am not sure. I would just say the Coach/Manager should be silent during the game, maybe give them a couple of time outs they can use to give clear instructions, but being shouted forwards and backwards and told what to do all the time will lead to a lack of independent thinking.

[Captain...]

4 minutes ago, Redouane said:

I hate this "Everybody gets a trophy" mentality. You develop with hard work, trying to be better than everybody else.. not by having unfair advantages.

 

Do you ever get unfair advantages like this in the real world? No, you need to take shit in your face, and use it as motivation. 

Yes, loads of people have unfair advantages, lets not crap all over the development of our kids because some washed up never made it is screaming his team of early developers to success with route one hoof ball to the big lad from Nigeria whose dad swears he's 9 despite having moustache and 2 kids.

[Captain...]

8 minutes ago, davieG said:

Some players will never be capable of thinking for themselves and there's some that don't want. They'll still need to be advised and cajoled.

But should they be the ones that are picked up and get an academy place, because they can run fast and stick a good cross in over and over again ahead of a more intelligent player that can grow and develop new skills, but isn't necessarily big and strong and fast and hasn't developed his playing style yet?

[TiffToff88]

19 minutes ago, Captain... said:

Disagree, everyone loves a close competitive match, if both teams are of mixed ability you get closer games and weaker players get to play against and with better players and improve. We are looking at development here and there is  so much time to develop, but we are quick pigeon holing kids as a B team left back before they have really come close to reaching their potential. If you have ability ranked teams and end up in the B team then when you get your chance in the A team you are completely overawed because you haven't played with these players before nor come up against the quality of players before.

 

That makes perfect sense to me, up to a level of course.

 

 

games are more competitive if everyone involved is at the same ability level. if you play mixed ability matches at youth level, you will get the more able players running rings around the less able. and the lesser players will end up feeling well out of their depth. The team i coach are usually split into 2 groups. better, more able players, and less able players who are mostly there to have fun and improve as footballers.

 

I guess it's all relative, It depends what the players want to get out of their playing experience at such a young age

[davieG]

Just now, Captain... said:

But should they be the ones that are picked up and get an academy place, because they can run fast and stick a good cross in over and over again ahead of a more intelligent player that can grow and develop new skills, but isn't necessarily big and strong and fast and hasn't developed his playing style yet?

I think you need a mix, being a great footballer is not dependent on your level of intelligence. 

For me a great 'team' has a diverse set of skills and personal characteristics. In the same way you don't want a team of automatons you surely don't want a team full of intellectual know it alls. Some people like to lead others like to be led.

[Dan]

20 minutes ago, Redouane said:

I hate this "Everybody gets a trophy" mentality. You develop with hard work, trying to be better than everybody else.. not by having unfair advantages.

 

Do you ever get unfair advantages like this in the real world? No, you need to take shit in your face, and use it as motivation to improve. And if you can't, then you aren't made for the cruel world  of football.

Agreed. Totally drives standards down. Demotivates people to actually try and win.

 

I have a memory of a football course I went on when I was about 11, we were playing a game and my team was winning comfortably. The coach joins the oppositions team, starts giving them stupid decisions, basically does everything in his power to give the other side the win, and they eventually do, I got sent home for kicking off at him  

[Captain...]

4 minutes ago, TiffToff88 said:

games are more competitive if everyone involved is at the same ability level. if you play mixed ability matches at youth level, you will get the more able players running rings around the less able. and the lesser players will end up feeling well out of their depth. The team i coach are usually split into 2 groups. better, more able players, and less able players who are mostly there to have fun and improve as footballers.

 

I guess it's all relative, It depends what the players want to get out of their playing experience at such a young age

That is all about game management, if you realise that their best player is up against your weakest player, instead of just letting him beat him over and over again you do something about it, if your left back is being done by the right winger, then the left winger needs to drop back and support him, and the left sided CM/CB needs to be a bit more aware and cover him. Or you swap your left back with your right back.

 

Add in the the manager not being able to instruct just ask questions, such as where are all their attacks coming from? would prompt kids to think and look for a solution rather than be told what to do.

[Captain...]

8 minutes ago, davieG said:

I think you need a mix, being a great footballer is not dependent on your level of intelligence. 

For me a great 'team' has a diverse set of skills and personal characteristics. In the same way you don't want a team of automatons you surely don't want a team full of intellectual know it alls. Some people like to lead others like to be led.

Of course, but at the moment very few English players coming through seem to have much "game intelligence" just look at England's perfomances, they don't seem able to adapt to any different approach and seem to struggle under new managers/formations more than foreign players. You talking of leaders and being led and all English players need to be led, with the exception being Harry Kane, who is a very instinctive footballer, but not the most intelligent and Dele Ali who didn't go to the academy of a big club, but he still needs a lot to learn about self control.

 

The issue is only part that "intelligent" players that could really develop are being overlooked, those that aren't "intelligent" are not being encouraged to develop that side of their game and are happy to become Jeff Schlupp, a natural athlete with very little between his ears. If more time had spent on developing the non physical aspects of his game he could have been some player.

[Captain...]

12 minutes ago, Dan LCFC said:

Agreed. Totally drives standards down. Demotivates people to actually try and win.

 

I have a memory of a football course I went on when I was about 11, we were playing a game and my team was winning comfortably. The coach joins the oppositions team, starts giving them stupid decisions, basically does everything in his power to give the other side the win, and they eventually do, I got sent home for kicking off at him  

This is nothing like that, it is a competitive game, but as soon as one team goes 4 goals up the other team get an advantage until they get it back to 3 goals up. It isn't a perfect solution, but you know what is happening at the start of the game so there is no need to kick off and call it unfair.

 

I think being 4-0 up is also demotivating, once you know the game is won you have a tendency to take it down a notch and just pass it around, having an extra player to play against gives you a greater challenge. That is the key here, I  don't think any of this is about trying to give everyone a trophy or rewarding mediocrity it is ensuring that all game time is productive and helps to develop  our young players skill sets and not just be a formulaic route to victory.

[davieG]

23 minutes ago, Captain... said:

Of course, but at the moment very few English players coming through seem to have much "game intelligence" just look at England's perfomances, they don't seem able to adapt to any different approach and seem to struggle under new managers/formations more than foreign players. You talking of leaders and being led and all English players need to be led, with the exception being Harry Kane, who is a very instinctive footballer, but not the most intelligent and Dele Ali who didn't go to the academy of a big club, but he still needs a lot to learn about self control.

 

The issue is only part that "intelligent" players that could really develop are being overlooked, those that aren't "intelligent" are not being encouraged to develop that side of their game and are happy to become Jeff Schlupp, a natural athlete with very little between his ears. If more time had spent on developing the non physical aspects of his game he could have been some player.

I wasn't  suggesting intelligence in players shouldn't  be developed I just don't see why it should one or the other surely a mix is the best option some players just need to be encouraged and that might mean they need to be cajoled a bit.