Player Development I

Time Of Possession
A Data-Based Take On Player Development

This is the first of a series of player development posts in which the data and resources which are beginning to be absorbed by the most effective youth clubs and systems across the globe will be presented with the particular focus on my observations in the Philly area and the college level.  The objective is simple.  To illustrate the current shift in coaching which recognizes that at the youth level (increasing in inverse proportion to age) that winning and individual development are mutually exclusive goals.  The hope being to contribute to the educational process not just of the players, but the adults involved so that a more intelligent standard of evaluation may be applied to a given player's experience, development and satisfaction with the game.

One of the main problems this change faces, however, is the lack of parent education on the subject.  Especially they aren't lifelong soccer folks (though that's no assurance they're on top of this shift, however slowly it's coming) adults just don't see the forest for the trees.  If a team is winning, the assumption is every kid on the team is a stud, and the team is well-run.  This is, to say the least, setting the bar pretty low on the scale by which soccer education is measured.  But, the clubs which fail to inform the families of the alternative are the most culpable.  And truly, shame on them...this information has been out there for years for anyone willing to look, so no member of the football community can claim to be unaware; therefore, they've willfully chosen to pursue less-effective methods.  Sheer laziness has held back clubs from getting their hands dirty and undertaking parent education as a crucial part of the betterment of the game.



U12 soccer has very little in common with the senior level of the game- though the emphasis on winning over technical development (analogous to scoring high on a standardized test versus actually learning about a subject) by the adults involved in youth sport make the commonalities more frequent than necessary. 8 players instead of 11 is the most obvious disparity.  But the lack of technical, psychological and physical maturity all reduces the game to a soccer-like activity, at best.  At worst, it's a contest of sheer physical superiority which just happens to include a ball.

The Data

One interesting area in which a sensible similarity was discovered was in time of possession.  From my time at Colgate where we tracked many statistics using our digital video program, it was clear that at the men's NCAA Division I level, the game broke down as follows:  The ball is in play for not more than 60 minutes per game- every whistle, dead ball, throw in, corner kick, etc. eats up 30 minutes of actual clock.  Of course, that does not include the time when the officials ask for the game clock to be stopped; injuries, subs in the last five minutes of a half, bookings, and so on.  The vast majority of games see an almost dead-even split of the remaining 60 minutes between the two teams.  Possession is a 50/50 proposition.  That two teams would split the game 50/50 is fairly intuitive; that the live action accounts for only 60 of 90 minutes is somewhat more surprising!

Sunday, at the Springboks' game, Grant Phelan generously spent the match in the technical area tapping a stopwatch app on the iPad, keeping track of how long the ball was out of play in the 60 minutes of game time.  He clocked 10 minutes, 2 seconds in the first half, and 11 minutes, 14 seconds in the second half.  On my wristwatch, I clocked the 'Boks in possession for 10 minutes, 16 seconds in the first half, and 9 minutes and 28 seconds in the second half.  So, the ball was in play for just under 20 minutes in the first half and 19 minutes in the second.

It was remarkable to me that the ball out of play stat was consistent with the senior level.  Given the erratic nature of U12 football, I expected to see far more dead time in a game.  So that was a pleasant surprise.  But, we must bear in mind that 39 minutes of live action is considerably less than the 60 minutes we think of a game as being.  Furthermore, if our players only have the ball in their possession for 19 minutes and 44 seconds, well, that's a depressingly small amount of time with the ball...and that time is spread across 8 positions and 11 players.

Now, I get that folks think winning makes for great players (the logical disconnect of good players and good teams that lose seems insurmountable sometimes).  But I would offer this data as the first indication that games (whether one wins or loses) aren't the best environment for players to learn how to play.  Simply put, if a player is on the field for three shifts (assuming she starts the match, with three subs, she should be rotated out twice in 30 minutes- I have better and worse moments in juggling this!) that's probably six minutes of bench time, or 24 minutes of game time.  If the ratios hold, that means our players get 8 minutes of soccer in possession of the ball per half.  Is anyone else curious how many touches that actually means?  In our warm-up, goofing around playing 5 v. 2, our players get more touches, I would submit, than they do in a game.

A couple thoughts:

• I will track, at some point, how many touches players get in a "60" minute match.  And I've already got a Haverford player or two interested in helping out later this term and next semester, so that might be a good task for them.  I've done a preliminary count in training using one of the Springbok's players...more in another post on this result!  
• It crosses my mind that given a team has so little of the ball in a game, perhaps it really isn't a big deal to play the strongest players more; it's so little time on the ball, developmentally it hardly matters.  Maybe we can have our cake and eat it, too; let's just play to win.  (I'm picturing folks reading those last couple sentences, nodding with a grim smile as they recall the past glories of U10 triumphs: "now he's starting to get it!" and I wonder if the idea that it might be their kid left on the bench ever crosses their mind.)  Of course, I'm kidding...what value there is in the game experience will continued to be shared.  Everyone pays the same, so they play the same, at least at this age group. 
• In all seriousness, having actually analyzed the game (and why I never clocked a youth game escapes me...), the player development approach (versus the "just win baby" approach) again looks the best method of creating a fun, challenging, and effective environment for helping kids become whatever they want to be- a top-level player, an enthusiastic fan, a referee (and great credit to the several Springboks who are refereeing this fall), a high school/college player, etc.  The reason  is simply that training more than playing gets the player more of the ball; more fun, experimentation & more improvement.
• I wonder if kids who play tons of games don't get better because the same psycho coaches who insist that 60-80 games per year is rational also require hour-long warm-ups.  To be fair, that's a lot of touches in addition to the match (and wouldn't 70 additional training sessions make a difference?!)  How ironic...
• This result supports the decision of the club (and DELCO/PAGS) to offer 8 v. 8 for U12s. Imagine how many fewer touches would be had if the game was 11-a-side, and the team only had possession for 20 of 60 minutes.  Good job us.
• If someone doesn't know enough about technical skill (and the development process of those skills) then wins and losses are the only way to evaluate.  But that's pretty unimaginative.  If you think your kid is great...keep track of the passes they complete (including throw-ins!)  Leon Britton completed 93.3% of his passes for Swansea in 2011-12.  Or track how many times he/she attempts to tackle, and ends up winning possession.  How many interceptions?  How many times does the player dribble at and beat a defender?  How many shots do they block?  When the ball is in the air (goal kicks, set pieces) how many times do they get to it first (esp. with their head...)?  Grab your watch and see how many minutes of possession the team has, for that matter.