By Ben Nicholson
August 11 – Although the MLS is deep into its regular season, US youth soccer seasons are soon to start again, in line with the conventional European calendar. And as the youth teams gear up, they will be adjusting to the new player development initiatives that the United States Soccer Federation (USSF) has established.
USSF is implementing a new model for youth soccer with an emphasis on small-sided games. The objective is to develop “more confident, skillful and smarter players at an early age.”
The premise for necessitating the change is that eleven-a-side is an adult game devised by and for adults, not necessarily appropriate for youth level. U.S. Youth Soccer sees small-sided games as a stair step for players to grow into the adult game.
The initiatives:
· The initiative’s four-tier structure affects youth development up to U13.
· Up until U8 games will be four-aside, without a goalkeeper, using size 3 balls. The focus is on developing motor skills (walking, running and changing direction) whilst getting as many touches of the ball as possible.
· U9 and U10 games will be seven-aside, now adding the goalkeeper and the offside rule, using size 4 balls. Once again a focus is lain on physical ability, as the stated rational is that “players at this age are [sic] need to develop speed and agility.” Therefore the pitch is extended, and the hope is that 1v1 situations will be created in different parts of the pitch.
The major change for the U9 and U10 age groups is that build out lines will be established fifteen yards from the end line, which opposition players cannot cross when the goalkeeper has a goal kick or has the ball during play.
The goalkeeper may not ‘punt’ the bull, but can only roll, throw or pass the ball out. Upon so doing, the build out line may be freely breached.
· At U11 and U12, the games go to 9v9 and the focus is on quickening decision making and improving vision and game intelligence.
· From U13 and upward games become 11v11 and size five balls are introduced.
These initiatives are stipulated best practice beginning in August 2016 and are mandatory by August 2017.
U.S. Youth Soccer theorise multiple benefits for the small-sided game model:
· More involvement in games as players have greater contact with the ball and greater instances of experiencing tactical problems (a theory that is backed not only by common sense but also by some experimental studies.)
· Players cannot hide, as they are forced to attack and defend to succeed
· Less bunching on the pitch entails that the game is less complicated and easier to understand
· Avoidance of the situation where players are prematurely given a formalized position before generating an understanding of large group tactics
· More fun and enjoyment
This list is not exhaustive of U.S. Youth Soccer’s, and nor is it immune from criticism.
The main question that arises is: are these benefits necessarily realised through the rule changes?
Carrie Taylor (pictured), Director of Coaching at Laguna United Football Club, believes “these initiatives have been a long time coming… The key with fewer numbers and smaller pitches is that players will have to become more technical and that hopefully will help US players become more technically proficient.”
Manu Appelius, the Technical Director of Santa Monica United Football Cub, who celebrated their 40th anniversary this past week and status as one of oldest youth clubs in the US, highlighted a concern that artificially manipulating the way the game is played could hinder the tactical development of youth players.
He said: “I think the ultimate goal in the US should be to continue to have the women dominate and to lead the men’s program to the same level of success of the women.
“Let’s talk about eleven-a-side not being implemented until U13, for example. American women have a huge advantage over the rest of the world and that is that girls start playing eleven-a-side at 10 years old, while in most countries that doesn’t happen until later on. So, tactically, American girls are a lot more advanced than their counterparts from other countries. Why eliminate that advantage?”
Although agreeing that the concept of getting more touches on the ball is good, Appelius believes that this can be achieved through training, without necessitating restructuring of the rules.
Taylor’s stance is that “people will say, it’s not ‘real soccer’, but I disagree. You get more attacking and defending, each player is involved more, and engaged more. I know the kids will probably like the changes more than the adults. Kids want to touch the ball, not stand around and watch.”
U.S. Youth Soccer cites physiological and psychological studies of youth players developing in the small-sided game environment. Lactate levels to stages of cognitive development were all considered for the new initiatives.
U.S. Youth Soccer even calculated the “lines of interaction” (the possible passing connections between players – alternatively described as tactical possibilities) to show that there is greater tactical complexity within an 11v11 game as opposed to a 7v7 game. (Twice as many according to the formula U.S. Youth Soccer use – which is n(n-1) where n = the number of players on the pitch.)
The implementation of the new regime perhaps suggests that USSF are trying to establish a national soccer identity.
During Spain’s reign as World Champions and European Champions, much was made of their ability to seamlessly plug players into their system, of technical character, and continue winning.
And the same rhetoric has been applied to Germany’s recent success. Jochem Low, current Germany national team manager, said after their 2014 World Cup victory: “We were together 55 days, but we started this project ten years ago. It was the result of many years of work, beginning under Jurgen [Klinsmann].”
Low’s implied attribution of, at least part of, the success to Jurgen Klinsmann, who is simultaneously the US national team manager and US Soccer technical director, bodes well for US soccer and its new initiatives since Klinsmann was likely heavily influential, if not the mastermind, behind them.
The proffered theory for Germany and Spain’s success goes that entrenching in players’ education a particular ethos prepares them for their eventual, hopefully, call up to the national team and enables the team to cohesively combine under the same standards that everyone has already mastered.
The apparent character of the USSF player initiatives is an emphasis on physical ability, which is a stipulated focus in both the four-aside and seven-aside rationales.
Particularly telling within the seven-aside rational is the insistence on development of speed and agility. The US is blessed with tremendous athletes, which everyone the world over gets to witness come every Olympic cycle as they reel in track medals by the bucket load, and it looks like, from the rationales and pitch designs, USSF want to utilise these strengths.
However, there is again a concern that, in the words of Appelius, “the U.S. federation is trying to mandate that American kids all play the game in a certain way. But the beauty of soccer is that it can be played in a lot of different ways. How can we think that one unformed way of playing the game is the right answer?”
Taylor notes that “the US is a melting pot and the different styles of play are kind of the American way.”
Time will tell what the practical impact of the new initiatives will be. Whatever the result, the intention is clear: the US is on a mission.
But even those best laid plans of mice and men…
Contact the writer of this story at moc.l1734839151labto1734839151ofdlr1734839151owedi1734839151sni@n1734839151osloh1734839151cin.n1734839151eb1734839151