For any coaches

[Tricky Trevor]

Came across this on FB and agree 100%.
Don’t know what the state of play is with English kids football but this should be the norm. Saw a piece today on Irish tv about the number of children giving up sport before secondary school. Situations like this could be a major cause of that.

IMG_3943.jpeg (318.31 KiB) Viewed 1608 times

[Big Vinny K]

Is that Benson on the bench ?

[Dark Cloud]

Came across this on FB and agree 100%.
Don’t know what the state of play is with English kids football but this should be the norm. Saw a piece today on Irish tv about the number of children giving up sport before secondary school. Situations like this could be a major cause of that.
IMG_3943.jpeg

Definitely and whole heartedly agree with this. Many years ago I took over an U11s team and the previous incumbent was all about winning and would happily take substitutes to games and not play them if he didn't think fit or the game was close. I immediately told them that every player at a match would get a decent spell on the pitch, whatever the situation. We didn't win so many games, but I still believe it was the right way to go about it. Some of the people who take kids football so seriously (coaches and parents) are a total embarrassment.

[jdrobbo]

Came across this on FB and agree 100%.
Don’t know what the state of play is with English kids football but this should be the norm. Saw a piece today on Irish tv about the number of children giving up sport before secondary school. Situations like this could be a major cause of that.
IMG_3943.jpeg

I don’t have any coaching qualifications but have led my primary school under 11s (boys and girls) football teams for the last 18 years. I always include all subs fairly and it amazes me how many don’t.

What surprises me most though, is that whilst it’s very easy to accuse coaches of being overly competitive, it’s easily resolved by including rules about subs, isn’t it?

Or in this scenario, would you find coaches turning up with no subs to avoid the ruling?

[Burnley1989]

I once got MOM in a 1/4 final aged 14, then was sub for the semis and wasn’t brought on, freezing cold, wet and gutted. We lost 2v0
You certainly don’t forget, yet I couldn’t even tell you the score in the 1/4 final

[bobinho]

I don’t have any coaching qualifications but have led my primary school under 11s (boys and girls) football teams for the last 18 years. I always include all subs fairly and it amazes me how many don’t.

What surprises me most though, is that whilst it’s very easy to accuse coaches of being overly competitive, it’s easily resolved by including rules about subs, isn’t it?

Or in this scenario, would you find coaches turning up with no subs to avoid the ruling?

I suppose you could try to control it with rules. Each team will have x4 substitutes for the game. All x4 subs will have at least ten continuous minutes each on the pitch. Any unused subs will result in one goal being awarded to the opposition for each unused sub. Any team turning up with less than the x4 required subs will have a goal awarded to the opposition for each sub they are short.

At this early stage in their development, everyone gets a game regardless.

[Westleigh]

Pal of mine coached a 16yr old team at school and he said that unfortunately if only the best team is picked every year by the time lads got to the fifth form there aren’t enough players left to pick from,can’t see anyway round it ,you can have a mediocre squad of 20 players or a good squad of 10 players.

[Quickenthetempo]

It's a good sentiment, but lots of subs in kids football are there because they are not very good at football.
And if you lose games every week because of weak subs, your better players want to leave.

Maybe play a 40 minute game and then a 20 minute game afterwards where all the subs have to play? For the younger teams.

[claptrappers_union]

My daughter plays u11s; they lost to a team who didn't play offsides (the ref went along with it?!), bullied our team with hoof ball tactics and didn’t even shake hands at the end.

It's a shame because they had some decent players in their team. I said to our girls after the match that they will paste them down the line because that team wont develop into decent footballers.

My daughter was the player of the match, so silver linings…

[tarkys_ears]

Yes... do it for the "likes"


...what a load of crap.

[claptrappers_union]

It's a good sentiment, but many subs in kids' football are there because they are not very good at football.

… yet.

I've seen girls in my daughter's team come on leaps and bounds over the course of a season. They need to find their best position sometimes.

That said, I get frustrated at parents getting too involved in the will-to-win games. They think it's damaging their kid's chances of becoming a professional. Mate, your kid will never play professionally; let it go.

[wilks_bfc]

As a coach of 7yrs and I’ve seen a fair few “winner all cost” coaches even at the younger age groups

We are now at u14 and have a squad of 19. The league this year brought in a rule of upto 7 subs, which personally think is too many. It reduces game time for players and trying to coordinate 7 subs is ridiculous

We go with a max of 5 which means at least 3 have a “rest week” which in the main happens naturally through holidays/injuries/illness but this week I had to name 2 to miss out. We never do it on ability, but purely on who has had the fewest weeks off.

It works out that they miss out 1 game in 7

Also, if they started as a sub one week, they will be starting the next game they play, regardless of their ability

[SurreyClaret]

I'm the Head of Youth at my local club and I've seen both good and bad examples (thankfully more of the former). I encourage all our coaches to rotate players fairly or at least give every player 50% of the match time and most do that.

One of the coaches at my club unfortunately only cares about winning, so he doesn't rotate subs enough, and keeps his best players on the pitch all game every game. The exception is his son who plays almost all the games despite being their weakest player. As a result he's had the most issues with players, the most complaints from parents and the highest turnover of kids on his team over the years.

He does coach U15's and at some point I suppose kids football turns into adult football and winning does become the overriding driver. I don't think U15 is that age though (probably U18) and this coach has unfortunately had his priorities wrong since U7's, as his ego and winning is all that matter to him.

The way that Youth football is structured, there are plenty of levels that teams can play at, and my advice to coaches is to put your team at a level where your squad is, not where your strongest team is, that way you can rotate subs and still be competitive.

The FA should take some blame here, they should implement rules that stipulate a minimum of 50% game time for each player (injuries being the obvious exception) - I'm pretty sure the parents would certainly let Coaches know if they were breaking an FA rule.
Unfortunately the FA give practically no specific rules or even regular helpful guidance to grassroots Coaches on what should be expected of them in terms of their own behaviour.

It should be common sense but some Coaches just don't have it. Some just need to be told what to do, why, and be given examples of what is likely to happen if they do illogical or even stupid things. Sadly it's this lack of rules or guidance that often leads to issues on and off the pitch at grassroot level. It's often to the detriment of the kids, who should always be the number one priority for Coaches but far too often aren't.

[wilks_bfc]

The way that Youth football is structured, there are plenty of levels that teams can play at, and my advice to coaches is to put your team at a level where your squad is, not where your strongest team is, that way you can rotate subs and still be competitive.

I’ve seen teams absolutely dominate a league by just playing the “strongest team” and then when moved up a level struggle because the squad hasn’t developed and request mid season to be moved back down.

[SurreyClaret]

On my level 1 course, the guy from the FA told me the best way to develop your team is to improve your weakest players. Football is a squad game and as they go through the age groups you need more players, and some will move on - it's not difficult to understand how important developing all your players is. One thing they won't do is develop whilst sat on the bench.

[claptrappers_union]

I wish I had gotten into football coaching years ago. I bet it's a satisfying role.

I tend to let the coach of my girls' team get on with it, and I don't interfere. I’d imagine bringing a more personal touch to the skills I’d learn from the courses. I see some coaches being a bit too shouty, going through the motions and not being as accommodating as they could be.

[SurreyClaret]

It's fun, rewarding but also painful at times, particularly dealing with some parents and opposition coaches. As a Coach you are also constantly learning. What I didn't realise until this season (I coach U13's) is how much puberty impacts development. A couple have my kids have had growth spurts and really kicked on versus the other players, surprisingly going from amongst our slowest players to some of our quickest.

It's made me quite excited to see how the other players are going to develop in the coming months and years - we've got one of the smallest teams in our league, some of the kids we've played against are massive and can use their size, pace and power to dominate games.

I've seen kids in our older teams go from being development level players to amongst the stronger players - just shows you why it's important not to give up on any kid, and why it's a shame when they give up on a sport early. It's why a coaches job is to keep it fun and the players engaged, not matter how big a pain they are at times!

[bfcjg]

Sometimes these coaches think and behave like they are Klopp on speed.

[GetIntoEm]

you need to remember that once the kids hit high school age the games are supposed to be classed as "competitive" with results and league tables published. Why wouldnt we be coaching teams to succeed in that platform? at what point do you think they should go to playing the strongest team?

anything under that age, i get it. rotate, but once you're in a competition you should be there to win it.

[Marney&Mee]

It's a tough one. Kids love having bragging rights after games/at school. So playing the best team makes sense...tho you have to be fair to the subs as well. Big difference between boys and girls teams. Boys hate being subs. Girls seem happier to be subbed and all players rotated.

[TheFamilyCat]

On my level 1 course, the guy from the FA told me the best way to develop your team is to improve your weakest players. Football is a squad game and as they go through the age groups you need more players, and some will move on - it's not difficult to understand how important developing all your players is. One thing they won't do is develop whilst sat on the bench.

I couldn't agree more. I coach an under-8's dual team, we are mid-level in our league.

So many coaches play an A&B team whereby the weaker players play together against weaker opposition every week. The argument is that weaker players don't/can't get involved playing in mixed teams with better players.

I have found that playing mixed teams has allowed the weaker players to develop faster by playing with and against better players.

[Foshiznik]

I was a coach for a U6s team up until U16s but this was 15 or so years ago when in my early 20s so alot has changed since then I am sure. I made 2 teams, one of the better players (as their parents were an absolute ball ache with their competitiveness and living their failed playing careers through their kids) and the rest. It was so much more enjoyable coaching the "B Team" as although we lost most games, every little success was celebrated by the whole team and by the end the worst players were almost up to the same standard as the rest. Much more smiles on the kid's faces than i ever saw in the "A Team" who were winning the league every other season.

[Foshiznik]

It's fun, rewarding but also painful at times, particularly dealing with some parents and opposition coaches. As a Coach you are also constantly learning. What I didn't realise until this season (I coach U13's) is how much puberty impacts development. A couple have my kids have had growth spurts and really kicked on versus the other players, surprisingly going from amongst our slowest players to some of our quickest.

It's made me quite excited to see how the other players are going to develop in the coming months and years - we've got one of the smallest teams in our league, some of the kids we've played against are massive and can use their size, pace and power to dominate games.

I've seen kids in our older teams go from being development level players to amongst the stronger players - just shows you why it's important not to give up on any kid, and why it's a shame when they give up on a sport early. It's why a coaches job is to keep it fun and the players engaged, not matter how big a pain they are at times!

I found the same really interesting. Found that the bigger kids at pre-pubescent age had stronger kicks, physicality, etc. so excelled in games but come U12s onwards the rest of the kids caught up.

[jrgbfc]

The way some parents behave is an absolute embarrassment, treating kids football as though it's the World cup final.
Is it right that at academy level parents are banned from watching, or have I imagined that?

[Marney&Mee]

The way some parents behave is an absolute embarrassment, treating kids football as though it's the World cup final.
Is it right that at academy level parents are banned from watching, or have I imagined that?

I think they can watch...but not pitch side

[Foshiznik]

The way some parents behave is an absolute embarrassment, treating kids football as though it's the World cup final.
Is it right that at academy level parents are banned from watching, or have I imagined that?

This is the only reason i packed in coaching. Too many failed as child athletes so put so much effort into trying to succeed through their kids.

[StayingDown4Ever]

On my level 1 course, the guy from the FA told me the best way to develop your team is to improve your weakest players. Football is a squad game and as they go through the age groups you need more players, and some will move on - it's not difficult to understand how important developing all your players is. One thing they won't do is develop whilst sat on the bench.

Sounds like you and Vincent spoke to the same guy from the FA!

But in all seriousness, if a weaker player was having an absolute torrid time of it even at the level you coach - would you continue to play them or give them a break for a while to restore confidence?

[Big Vinny K]

Got asked to run an under 12s team. I reluctantly agreed.
Regretted it almost immediately. Parents were a nightmare and unfortunately so were some of their kids.
Parents complaining about their kids not starting or being substituted. I always brought on all the substitutes irrespective of the score.

I warned the parents several times that it was them who had asked me to run the team and if they continued to moan during the games on Sundays then I would quit. They did continue and for the sake of the kids I gave it till the end of the season and then quit.

These same parents were also arguing with referees and opposition parents and it led to fighting on one occasion. Absolute embarrassment.

When I played as a kid and all the way through secondary school - 2 or 3 times a week - there were only 2 of our teams dads who used to come and watch us every single week. And it was pretty much the same for the teams we were playing too. The only exceptions were finals when more of the parents would turn up. None of them would ever have dreamt of saying anything to the coach or the officials.

Unfortunately it’s not just the parents these days that are the problem with kids football. A lot of the managers are even worse - big ego trips and many doing it all for the wrong reasons

[CoolClaret]

Been there at one club as a youngster - truly horrible feeling being 6 or 7 yr old and not getting a kick.

Infact I joined this one particular club at the end of their season because all my mates from school played for said team and they were having a team photo - manager didn't let me on it because I hadn't played the season, I was literally 7 years old and very confused about it all.

Some strange blokes out there.

[Superjohnnyfrancis]

Sounds like you and Vincent spoke to the same guy from the FA!

But in all seriousness, if a weaker player was having an absolute torrid time of it even at the level you coach - would you continue to play them or give them a break for a while to restore confidence?

There must be part of his pro license which says you play them till they are irreparably mentally damaged!

[claptrappers_union]

Sounds like you and Vincent spoke to the same guy from the FA!

But in all seriousness, if a weaker player was having an absolute torrid time of it even at the level you coach - would you continue to play them or give them a break for a while to restore confidence?

Surely at u11's level, unless they are in a professional academy pathway or something. They shouldn't be having a torrid time at all; they should be having fun and thats it.

[SurreyClaret]

Every kid is different, and Coaches might have to handle situations differently, but all players need sufficient opportunity to develop. Coaches forget that they develop at different speeds and times. Often I find the reasons kids have a torrid time is because of the culture that exists around their team, and the behaviour of coaches, parents and other kids. As a coach you have to safeguard every player and call out poor behaviour when you see it, including from the opposition. Kids need to feel safe, encouraged and have fun to stay in the game and develop.

Using the U12/13 shift from development to competitive as the sole reason to focus fully on winning is frankly ridiculous in my opinion, and a failing of the FA message. It's all development football up to U18, and the only thing that actually changes at that age is that the leagues are allowed to publish results and tables. Some kids are competitive, some aren't, so why should there be a set date when a coach can then decide certain kids need to spend most of their time on the bench?

Of course everyone wants to win, and that's fine, but it should not be at the expense of certain kids over others. It shouldn't result in kids, coaches and referees leaving the game, which is what happens right now (look at your local leagues and see how many teams disappear as you go up the age groups, it's staggering).

Whenever I hear coaches say it's U13's so it's competitive football now, it's just them trying to justify making decisions that negatively impact some of their kids, in my opinion often putting their ego's first. Are the FA saying that kids can't develop after U13? Of course not, as it's still development football, and all kids should still be provided a fair opportunity. It doesn't mean it's not competitive, it is, but it shouldn't be a win at all costs gladiatorial battle every weekend.

If a Coach wants to win every week, drop down a division, but winning every week isn't the best for players development either. In my experience, the Coaches who have that win at all costs attitude are the same ones abusing referees and getting misconduct charges from the FA. At some point the FA need to wake up and start giving proper guidance and rules to Coaches in my opinion.