2. Reference Points
“Great clubs have had one thing in common throughout history, regardless of era and tactics. They owned the pitch and they owned the ball. That means when you have the ball, you dictate play and when you are defending, you control the space.”
-Arrigo Sacchi
It’s hard to argue with Sacchi’s conclusions regarding what defines the truly dominant teams in football’s history. The hard part, of course, is figuring out how to get to that point as a team. In the feedback loop of football analysis, we must ask ourselves: Where does the loop start? What is causing us to lack the skills and awareness necessary to succeed in the game? What can we do to change things?
These are the questions du jour and the feedback from the top is illuminating. A recent article in ESPN published responses from Bob Bradley, John Hackworth, Caleb Porter, Tab Ramos, Thomas Rongen, Sigi Schmid, and Earnie Stewart to the following prompt:
“…[W]here the assembly line for domestic soccer talent is faltering, where it needs tinkering, and where wholesale changes are necessary.”
With the exception of U.S. U-23 Coach Caleb Porter, each respondent pointed to the black box combination of American youth soccer and the supposed cultural inferiorities of American soccer as compared to other countries like Holland as the primary causes for inability to compete at the highest levels.
An excerpt from Porter’s response:
“The priority has to be development over winning. I think you can win and develop players, but in order to do that you have to have a philosophy. A process, an approach, or some kind of a method is the most important thing at younger age … [a]t the end of the day, it’s going to take a long-term vision and some sort of philosophy.”
Watching Porter’s Akron teams over the last couple of seasons, it is immediately evident that his teams have an identity and adhere to a philosophy. They possess the ball, press in unison, and have concerted movement off the ball. Akron players come from all over the U.S. (and a few internationally) from diverse youth backgrounds. After the 2010 season, Akron lost 8 players to the MLS draft including central midfielders Anthony Ampaipitakwong and Perry Kitchen, two of the focal points of the 2010 team’s style and success. Yet, despite the turnover and diversity of backgrounds Porter’s 2011 Akron team played the same style as the national champion 2010 team. Porter’s teams control games as Sacchi described, forcing teams to chase them by keeping possession of the ball through deliberate buildup play and controlling space to recover the ball quickly if possession is lost.
Porter’s response to the ESPN interview question reflects his commitment to designing and cultivating a footballing system based on a coherent philosophy. If there is no philosophy, there is no context by which to assess whether a player is “good,” or to separate the signal from the noise of what player qualities will serve the team’s collective goals. The philosophy starts the loop of player and team development and identification, not the other way around.
Of course, every philosophy and system is complex and has multiple subparts that must undergo detailed refinement in order to adapt successfully to changing opponents and playing styles. Some of this can be rehearsed in practice and some must be improvised during play. The ability to identify, refine, and implement these subparts is what separates the world’s best from the mediocre. While the big picture philosophy (i.e. possession v. counter-attack) is important, it is meaningless unless a philosophy’s granular details can be conveyed to players and rehearsed into memory. At this level is where a player must absorb the “rules” and reference points of the game in order to make good decisions on the field.
The following reference points provide critical information each player should synthesize continually during a game to inform their own decisions: location of space, location of teammates, location of opponents, the goal, and the ball. An appropriate interpretation of these reference points provides a player with a clear map of the field and lays the groundwork for making critical decisions at speed. Of course, the details of interpretation are critical! Here are some interpretive suggestions to consider in relation to the details of each reference point. :
Location of space: With the ball, the entire field should be utilized. Seeking out space and identifying location of teammates when choosing movements is necessary to create and exploit space effectively. This places emphasis on the ability to control the ball instantly and play accurate, appropriately weighted passes as opposed to ability to routinely dribble past players. More space leads to more time on the ball and balanced spacing forces the opponent to cover more ground to defend.
Lack of proper spacing is a significant contributor to breakdown of passing sequence for many American teams, particularly with regards to centerback spacing. Akron’s centerbacks are instructed to drop deep and wide when in possession in order to give their midfielders more room to operate and provide a drop pass outlet if the move going forward isn’t on. This expands the playing area and forces the opponent to cover more ground to recover the ball, particularly when an outside back or central midfielder is in posession. Unfortunately, this isn’t something that is demanded of most MLS centerbacks. Instead, you’ll see lack of movement or crowding of the midfielders when MLS teams have the ball in the back line. Of course, Barcelona are a great reference point for how this is done properly, as the video below demonstrates.
The location of space has obvious relationships with the location of teammates and opponents and can change based on formations or opponents tactics. “Parking the bus” by crowding 10 players between the 18 and the half line is a common response to teams that are comfortable in possession and look to expand the playing area. This tactic requires players to to work in tighter spaces and make quicker decisions in response to the congestion in the opponents third of the field.
Location and movement of teammates: Identifying location and distances of teammates allows a player to make decisions quickly under pressure after they have moved into space. Further, players should avoid crowding spaces where teammates are already located. Balanced deployment of players without the ball forces opponents to defend accordingly i.e. it’s easier for an opponent to defend 2 players if they are passing 5 feet apart. It’s not possible for one defender to defend the same 2 players if they are passing 15-30 feet apart.
Balanced spacing and phased forward movement in unison also provides a risk mitigant by ensuring that a team doesn’t get “stretched out” when building possession towards the opponent’s goal. The distances between the forward, midfield, and defensive “lines” is important. If the forwards or midfielders leave behind the defenders by rushing towards goal, gaps between the lines occur which can be exploited if possession is lost.
This concept has similar implications for horizontal movement and specific positional play. Sergio Busquets, FC Barcelona’s holding midfielder/volante is trained to perfection to recognize where he needs to be to balance out the attack and mitigate for risk in case possession is lost. He is ridiculed for not being a dynamic “box-to-box” type player by many in the English and American press. This is nonsense, Busquets’ movement and positioning is a function of Barcelona’s entire system. If Busquets’ moves too far right-left-forward-back this limits his playing options after receiving (the crowding problem) and creates balance distortion that can be fatal if FCB loses possession. This is what Busquets has been trained to do, not an indictment of his abilities.
Location and movement of opponents: When a player is in possession or about to receive a pass, the importance of this reference point is fairly obvious. Location of the opponent will likely determine how much pressure will exist and what a player’s distribution options will be once he receives the ball.
A somewhat counterintuitive aspect of this point is that sometimes being surrounded by opponents is a good thing. If you’re in a wing position without the ball surrounded by two or three opponents should you try to “get open” for a pass by moving to another location on the field? If your spacing with your teammates is appropriate the answer is most likely no! The fact that you’re double or triple covered means that there are vast amounts of space open somewhere else on the field for your team to exploit due to the opponent’s woeful lack of balance.
Location and movement of the ball: The location of the ball can be a seductively illusive data point. When we’re closer to the ball, we feel more likely to receive it. Does that mean that everyone should move closer to the ball? Doing so would likely destroy the space and options you have to work with after receiving the ball. We’d be playing bunch ball like we did as kids!
The bunch ball idea seems like it should be a relic of soccer at the youngest ages, but the negative effects of ball crowding are on display in plenty of professional games! Getting the ball by moving closer isn’t enough. The systemic context of a movement must be evaluated. That’s why you see often see Xavi or Iniesta backing up into space when the ball is being moved up the field rather than impatiently “checking” towards their teammate with the ball. Just getting the ball at your feet isn’t enough to be effective. The sequence and context must constantly be observed and synthesized.
The distinction is between focusing on getting where the ball needs to go based on the reference points described above, as opposed to where the ball is.
Location of the Goal: Scoring goals is obviously the means by which a team wins a game. However, creating goal scoring opportunities is far more complex than directing a team’s attention towards constant advancement towards the goal.
Goal location becomes more important as a team advances up the field in that playing the ball more centrally (where the goal is located) increases a team’s options for playing towards goal. If a team is in possession in the opponents third, their attacking options are limited to crosses. In contrast, if a team has the ball in centrally in the opponent’s third, the team can shoot, chip or play diagonally through the opponents defense.
Mutual understanding and interpretation of these data points (and I’m sure there are plenty of nuances I’m missing) help serve as the building blocks for producing a team that can dominate possession and control a game. It requires collective commitment and humility to understand how each part works and is important to the success of the system. This video analysis of FC Barcelona’s collective movement and spacing is a great display of these concepts (the whole video is great; the spacing analysis starts at around 6:00):
http://www.youtube.com/user/allasFCB2#p/search/0/I6A_K8oWqfk
Caleb Porter’s successful implementation of a philosophy in the image of the world’s best at Akron and the recent U-23 camps is an inspirational point of pride for U.S. Soccer. Porter’s U-23 team recently scrimmaged the senior national team, and reports indicate that he has been able to implement the same cohesive style with the U-23s as his Akron teams, dominating possession and forcing the senior national to chase the game. Of course, Porter is one person within the infrastructure of U.S. Soccer. Skepticism of Porter’s methods is unavoidable and change will not come easy. The responses of the other 6 coaches to the ESPN prompt are reminders of why we’ve been stuck in neutral.
Former U.S. National Team Coach Bob Bradley: “It still comes down to how many good people get with clubs and are working with young kids to make sure things are done right.”
Former U-20 National Team Coach Tomas Rongen: “I got a lot of players on the U-20 national team that were technically very deficient, and they were some of the best players in the country.”
Philadelphia Union Youth Coordinator John Hackworth: “Ours is a very result-oriented culture — specifically parents of young children — and the only way they can measure whether their child is doing something good is whether they won on a Saturday. And that’s the wrong way to look at how to become a really good soccer player.”
These statements are passive 10,000 foot level shirks that do not add anything to the discourse. Yes, there are flaws in the incentives and infrastructure currently in place. Anyone who has come in the slightest contact with U.S. Soccer as a player or coach can identify that immediately. But these guys are the pros, right? Here’s an opportunity to say something meaningful, specific, and insightful about deficiencies in our Soccer DNA that people can learn from. Instead they take the easy way out and provide some pseudo-intellectual cop out story about how the “assembly line” just isn’t producing players that are good enough for these coaches to do anything when they come into contact with them.
Nonsense. Caleb Porter was the only respondent to step up and provide meaningful specifics. His approach should be embraced as an initiator of evolution within U.S. Soccer.
Football Garden
