Recently having spent some time on a formal coaching qualification, as a part of the course we in depth about game and training formats. We discussed how different formats (1v1, 2v2, 3v3, 5v5, 7v7 and 11v11) can develop players in different ways to develop a multitude of capabilities. Not only how this can develop capabilities within a player but also suit that players strongest capabilities. At times we speak a lot about how players can potentially interchange up and down age groups to accommodate players technical ability or their physical growth. This is to help provide a different challenge for those technically striving, stereotypically progress into an older age group and likewise for physically early developers. Meanwhile for those who are physically late developers at times we can place in a younger age group to compete against players potentially of similar physical development. Upon going away and reflecting upon the course and then reflecting back on previous experiences, how we can maximise the different game and training formats to bring out the best capabilities in players?
Great research into small sided games (SSG’s) and different formatted football has shown to create different opportunities for players (more/less touches, different physical outputs, different social outcomes, change in tactical understanding. As a part of this course, we were required to work in pairs to select and observe a single player across a tournament format which included 7v7, 9v9 and 3v3 formats, all teams competing in the tournament would play equal games across all 3 formats. The player selected by myself and my partner immediately caught our eyes during the start of the tournament as he was deemed physically a late developer in comparison to those who was on their team and on the opposition teams. As the tournament start, the first game they played in was 7v7, playing in a wide midfield roll. The player showed great confidence and desire to get on the ball by communicating and demanding the ball, always turning and receiving to play forward and direct. And demonstrated a high level of technical ability and ball striking on both feet. This game was a stereotypical sized 7v7 game, this player was striving and having a real impact upon the game. Fast forward to the next game, the 9v9 game. For this game the player was place at full back in a back 3 on a large 9v9 pitch was reaching the maximum size of pitch for this age group. The player had a good game but this time was communicating far less, less touches, looked to play quicker rather than taking touches and driving into space, didn’t want to overlap. I appreciate this observation was over a 45-50 minute observation but upon reflection with my partner and as a whole group reflection, we discussed how the 7v7 game suited the player more than the 9v9 game. Which could of been as a result of sizing of the pitch, what the player’s key capabilities are, conditions (extremely hot weather and plenty of minutes). As the observation developed, we were unable to watch the player in the 3v3 format, but discussed how the player could of potentially strived again with the tight compact pitch that would of been to the benefit of his capabilities.
This got me thinking about the smaller game and training formats. We see players strive and excel at one format and then struggle when they progress through to the next. How can we combat this within our session and practice designs? Do we create more practices which provide greater opportunities for different formats and outcomes? I think we must continue as much as possible to expose players to different formats all the way from 1v1 to age appropriate format for the players which must not only be limited to equal teams but also to over/under loads. I believe that all formats have great benefits for all players capabilities, the use of these formats can be designed to be purpose and relevant to the game as a whole. This must not be to the detriment how the game looks on the weekend, which highlights an importance of transference from this game (training) to the game (match day). As the players advance through the game formats continuity and progression of multiple formats will support the players growth and development of capabilities within the game.
As we discuss the use of different formats, we must also discuss the importance of difference and constraints within their game formats. Through personal experience and design from others, I really value and appreciate the importance of tournaments, cup games, tours (UK and aboard). Competitions, domestic tournaments and foreign tournaments create a whole new environment which at times in certain surroundings the greater opportunity to focus on winning and being competitive. This can be aided by the constraints and rules being put in place by the competition or tournament organisers. For example different pitch sizes, defensive third penalty areas (full width of defensive for GK’s), dribble ins, In-direct free kicks only, certain players allowed into certain zones of the pitch. All this constraints and rules impact the players with vast learning opportunities and experiences which still host the integrity of the game but differences to bring out different players capabilities within a game. These opportunties all together provide so many positive learning experiences and outcomes on and off the pitch. But to focus on the pitch, provide players with different constraints and adaptations to their game formats can enhance creativity in regardless to the bending and ‘interpretation’ of the rules. Players can be very smart and quick to use constraints to their advantage to benefit their game (e.g dribble ins = Shift touch + Shot ). This diversification provides players with the opportunity to combine previous learning + experiences with cause + effect (trial+error) through the means of a different structure of the game.
Sempre Avanti Coach 