M********t
发帖数: 355 | 1 这个作者, 就是前一阵风靡一时的U11 Possession Soccer录像的教练， 自我吹嘘的厉
害， 不过帖子还是很有营养的。
There are many fundamental issues with talk of ‘style of play’.
I’ll state two (which are intimately linked):
1) You can’t ‘copy’ a style of play. (on the coaching front)
A ‘style of play’ is a specialty – like neurosurgery or cardiovascular
surgery. Yes, it’s all medicine, and yes there are overlapping competencies
, but one practitioner can’t just up and do the other with the same degree
of expertise.
He essentially has to start from ground zero, spend years and years on it,
and in all likelihood will never be as good as the guy who’s already
dedicated his life to it. Not just because of the head start, but because of
all the existing influences and habits developed.
And there’s the confortable allure of going back to ‘what you know’
instead of the suffering, sacrifice, and series of failures required in the
transformation.
2) You can’t ‘copy’ a style of play. (on the player front)
How a player plays is tied to his culture.
How he moves, how he thinks about the game, how he executes on the field. It
is why generally a Brazilian does not play the same way as an Argentine,
who does not play like a Mexican, who does not play like an Englishman. It
is why a player ‘fits’ or doesn’t ‘fit’ with certain teams and coaches.
Amateurs don’t understand this.
Especially number 1. Not really, anyways. They think problems are obvious,
and solutions are obvious.
Amateurs seem to think because something is linguistically or intellectually
simple, that there isn’t a glacier of complexity behind the simple. Unless
, they’ve been educated otherwise.
* If you’ve got an irreparable heart, the solution is simple; replace the
heart.
But of course in matters of medicine, the layman – the amateur – has been
‘educated’ from birth that these things are not simple. That terrible
complexities exist, and that they are not qualified to analyze them. Sure
you have a god given right to your opinion, but it is not on par with those
who have dedicated their life to the subject. And everyone accepts that.
Everyone has been trained to accept that.
* Want to send a man to the moon? Simple. Build a big rocket, point it to
the moon, and fire!
Why would this take decades, and the mobilization of an entire nation?
Many of these and other professions/subjects are pretty universally accepted
as “hard”.
As such, it’s pretty wacky to think you know medicine because you were a
patient or caregiver. Or that you can do orbital mechanics for a deep space
mission.
You have been ‘educated’ to know it’s not simple. And you can envision
your ignorant paralysis if you were given a scalpel or a differential
equation.
Similarly, there’s a range of subjects and disciplines we’ve all been
conditioned to view as easy.
* Flipping burgers at McDonalds is the prolific example.
Then of course, we’ve all got concepts of the occupations in between ‘
rocket science’ and ‘flipping burgers’.
Soccer/Football
Somehow we got it in our heads that coaching soccer is simple.
Perhaps it’s because anyone can quickly become a coach?
Well, anyone can quickly become a parent. Is that simple?
Anyone can be a writer. Is that simple?
Anyone can give a speech. How simple is that?
But back to the simple view of coaching …
Training?
Meh … pick some drills from a book or the internet, have the players do
them, scrimmage, and say a couple words.
Games?
Meh … pick 11 players, put them on the field in some formation, and off we
go. Maybe you make a couple subs. The team with the better players usually
wins.
Rosters?
Meh … just get the “best players”.
Managing?
Meh … keep the players happy and motivated.
The end.
Now, now, of course many will say …
“No Gary, we know there’s more to it than that.”
And I know some people get that. But I also know they have no clue how deep
the rabbit hole goes.
If they did, they would never think that a coach can simply ‘copy’ a
different style of play after he’s specialized in his own. They would know
it would require an enormous effort for many years to approach the success
of a colleague already specialized in that style.
A successful change in style – especially a huge one – requires a
departure from how you been training for say 20 years, how you’ve been
managing games and players, and how you’ve been identifying the ‘best
players’ for your style.
And the whopper: a cultural shift.
You can’t just flip a switch!
You will have to go through years of trial and error.
And it won’t be the same process as that of a newly minted coach either.
You will have the added baggage of 20+ years of doing things the old way.
Not to mention, your assistants and the circles you run in, have got the
same baggage. You gonna change them to?
Now, there’s a ton of reasons for you possibly not believing what I’m
telling you, but perhaps foremost among them is that unlike other
professions, you haven’t been educated in this one – in soccer.
And there’s a ton of reasons for that as well, perhaps foremost … demand.
You Won’t do it!
Whereas above I said: “you can’t copy ‘a style of play’”, now I say:
“you won’t”.
When you’ve been ‘successful’ with your product, do you tear it down and
fix it? Even if evidence suggests or proves there’s something better or a
changing trend?
You think Bruce Arena or Sigi Schmid are going to transform themselves?
Check out what Sigi said on January 16th, when asked about his philosophy on
picking players in the draft:
“At the end of the day uh … you know best athlete …”
Only to immediately “correct” himself;
“or best soccer player, not best athlete, but best soccer player, is what
we’re looking to pick”
Doh! Yeah, nice try buddy.
Originial source
You think that college coach who’s won some things (or whose job doesn’t
depend on winning) is going to change?
You think that youth coach with prestigious tournament titles, or a secure
job, or doesn’t really care either way, is going to change?
But suppose one would like to. Let’s say a high level youth coach with 20+
years experience in jungle ball with an enormous trophy case has a coming to
Jesus moment and wants to produce a product like ours.
Thinking he can match our expertise in our style is insane! We have decades
of experience over him. Understand this: We are decades more qualified than
Bruce Arena in our style of play. As he is in his (whatever that may be).
This is a major reason why Barcelona (and others) ‘share’ what they do.
They know exactly what I’m telling you now.
You can’t just copy it!
You’re going to have to work on it for a long time. So the sooner you start
, the better. And best if you get a mentor. | x********g
发帖数: 3717 | | m******4
发帖数: 2810 | 3 等不及可以用谷歌翻译。
【在 x********g 的大作中提到】
: 等plutus翻译成天朝文再看。
| e*******e
发帖数: 9616 | 4 结论：
１。中国人还是得走自己的路，搬不来艺术／糙快猛。
２。但是模仿的过程中可以演生出／悟出适合自己的风格，好的教练员／团队会figure
out 快些，但是这种教练中国人里不超过１－２个。徐根宝算一个。日本人里大把大
把的教练悟出来。
３。在悟出来风格以后，还有个难关，就是坚决走下去。这个中国目前的气候也不行＝
走不通。好像最近大老又在说要象搞奥运会那样搞起来中国足球，我看又完了。奥运会
就是集中的尖子训练，足球遮掩搞不行。另外，让外行领导足球３００年都是输的料。
再操蛋也得找懂行的人搞。 | G*****h
发帖数: 33134 | 5 别把足球神化了
没那么玄
踢的人多了也就成了气候
figure
【在 e*******e 的大作中提到】
: 结论：
: １。中国人还是得走自己的路，搬不来艺术／糙快猛。
: ２。但是模仿的过程中可以演生出／悟出适合自己的风格，好的教练员／团队会figure
: out 快些，但是这种教练中国人里不超过１－２个。徐根宝算一个。日本人里大把大
: 把的教练悟出来。
: ３。在悟出来风格以后，还有个难关，就是坚决走下去。这个中国目前的气候也不行＝
: 走不通。好像最近大老又在说要象搞奥运会那样搞起来中国足球，我看又完了。奥运会
: 就是集中的尖子训练，足球遮掩搞不行。另外，让外行领导足球３００年都是输的料。
: 再操蛋也得找懂行的人搞。
|
|
