Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] for help. Thanks :)
Private profiles - please note that profiles marked as private will soon be public. This will facilitate moderation so mods can view users' warning histories. All of your posts across the site will appear on your profile page (including PI, RI). Groups posts will remain private except to users who have access to the same Groups as you. Thread here
Some important site news, please read here. Thanks!

U12 girls GAA

  • 16-08-2020 6:48am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 86 ✭✭ Moshman


    Won't bore you with the details, but, having observed coaching practices that I find particularly questionable, I have one question with regard to competitive sport for children.

    Which is more important?
    1. Winning the game at the expense of losing kids in sport and knocking their confidence or
    2. Building confidence, friendship and keeping children active at the expense of losing the game.

    I don't believe that both goals are mutually exclusive, but, from what I've observed, many coaches do....


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 10,525 ✭✭✭✭ salmocab


    I’m about to head out the door to coach u6 rugby, it’s the same in every sport some coaches lose sight of what they are meant to be doing. In general I think they mean well but Sometimes they lose the run of themselves. I see it out walking the dog with soccer coaches shouting at defenders to hoof the ball up the pitch with no attempt to use skills.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,492 ✭✭✭ joebloggs32


    Moshman wrote: »
    Won't bore you with the details, but, having observed coaching practices that I find particularly questionable, I have one question with regard to competitive sport for children.

    Which is more important?
    1. Winning the game at the expense of losing kids in sport and knocking their confidence or
    2. Building confidence, friendship and keeping children active at the expense of losing the game.

    I don't believe that both goals are mutually exclusive, but, from what I've observed, many coaches do....

    I think you know the answer to this if you are asking the question.

    It takes real leadership in GAA club to foster an environment whereplayer development and enjoyment trimps short term success.
    Look up Shane Smith and see if you could convince your club chairman to bring him in to talk to your underage coaches


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,622 ✭✭✭ jrosen


    I think both are equally as important and actually a good coach can balance both. However as the kids get older it becomes more about building a strong team and winning. In my experience of other sports its about the U12 that the change starts to happen.


  • Registered Users Posts: 725 ✭✭✭ C.O.Y.B.I.B


    Moshman wrote: »
    Won't bore you with the details, but, having observed coaching practices that I find particularly questionable, I have one question with regard to competitive sport for children.

    Which is more important?
    1. Winning the game at the expense of losing kids in sport and knocking their confidence or
    2. Building confidence, friendship and keeping children active at the expense of losing the game.

    I don't believe that both goals are mutually exclusive, but, from what I've observed, many coaches do....
    At u12 number 2 is more important . However in Dublin once they hit U13 that's when the teams become streamed and a player may end up on an A Team or a B Team which is when things change . Scores get recorded , Dublin development teams start knocking . However it important to keep the camraderie and to keep boosting confidence and this is a key part of the coaches job.


  • Registered Users Posts: 86 ✭✭ Moshman


    I think you know the answer to this if you are asking the question.

    It takes real leadership in GAA club to foster an environment whereplayer development and enjoyment trimps short term success.
    Look up Shane Smith and see if you could convince your club chairman to bring him in to talk to your underage coaches

    Yeah, I know what my opinion is but I also hear the parents (mainly mothers) commenting from the sideline, "why are they playing her?" and encouraging their daughters to kick for points (where Dean Rock would think twice) instead of passing it into the forwards who might be deemed weaker.
    There's obviously a diversity of opinion and I'd be interested to get the thinking behind the opinion that winning is more than than kids development


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,622 ✭✭✭ jrosen


    Moshman wrote: »
    Yeah, I know what my opinion is but I also hear the parents (mainly mothers) commenting from the sideline, "why are they playing her?" and encouraging their daughters to kick for points (where Dean Rock would think twice) instead of passing it into the forwards who might be deemed weaker.
    There's obviously a diversity of opinion and I'd be interested to get the thinking behind the opinion that winning is more than than kids development

    Sport by nature is competitive. At some point the focus will shift to building a strong squad. Within that team those same values still apply. They still play to enjoy, to support each other. But the squad can only have so many players.

    As for sideline parents? Well they will always have an opinion.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,198 ✭✭✭ dobman88


    I'm a big fan of silent sidelines. We have had training sometimes when the young lads have had games and with silent sidelines you can hear the kids on the pitch having great fun, enjoying themselves and laughing away. Not looking in confusion at adults shouting at them. Would love to see it implemented up to and including under 14 maybe.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,967 ✭✭✭✭ The Lost Sheep


    Moshman wrote: »
    Won't bore you with the details, but, having observed coaching practices that I find particularly questionable, I have one question with regard to competitive sport for children.

    Which is more important?
    1. Winning the game at the expense of losing kids in sport and knocking their confidence or
    2. Building confidence, friendship and keeping children active at the expense of losing the game.

    I don't believe that both goals are mutually exclusive, but, from what I've observed, many coaches do....
    2 should always be first but you need to think about winning from u14/15 up
    jrosen wrote: »
    I think both are equally as important and actually a good coach can balance both. However as the kids get older it becomes more about building a strong team and winning. In my experience of other sports its about the U12 that the change starts to happen.
    It shouldnt have to be from u12 and under 12 and below certainly should be non competitive.
    At u12 number 2 is more important . However in Dublin once they hit U13 that's when the teams become streamed and a player may end up on an A Team or a B Team which is when things change . Scores get recorded , Dublin development teams start knocking . However it important to keep the camraderie and to keep boosting confidence and this is a key part of the coaches job.
    How many clubs would be fielding more than 2 sides above under 12 when you dont field 15 a side?
    dobman88 wrote: »
    I'm a big fan of silent sidelines. We have had training sometimes when the young lads have had games and with silent sidelines you can hear the kids on the pitch having great fun, enjoying themselves and laughing away. Not looking in confusion at adults shouting at them. Would love to see it implemented up to and including under 14 maybe.
    Silent sidelines are good to an extent but not all the time.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,820 ✭✭✭ smelly sock


    Moshman wrote: »
    Won't bore you with the details, but, having observed coaching practices that I find particularly questionable, I have one question with regard to competitive sport for children.

    Which is more important?
    1. Winning the game at the expense of losing kids in sport and knocking their confidence or
    2. Building confidence, friendship and keeping children active at the expense of losing the game.

    I don't believe that both goals are mutually exclusive, but, from what I've observed, many coaches do....


    Why don't you volunteer?


  • Registered Users Posts: 115 ✭✭ Alpha Centauri


    Moshman wrote: »
    W
    2. Building confidence, friendship and keeping children active at the expense of losing the game.

    All day long this is MOST important.

    Read an article about Corofin recently saying how they dont focus on winning at juvenile , its all about developing players to get them to senior level.

    inevitably some sideline Parents mightn't be a fan of this strategy, same parents wouldn't volunteer a few hours a week and help out with the team either.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 725 ✭✭✭ C.O.Y.B.I.B


    2 should always be first but you need to think about winning from u14/15 up

    It shouldnt have to be from u12 and under 12 and below certainly should be non competitive.

    How many clubs would be fielding more than 2 sides above under 12 when you dont field 15 a side?


    Silent sidelines are good to an extent but not all the time.

    There would be 12/13 clubs off the top of my head in Dublin fielding 2 or more teams at u13 girls and making sure these are all happy and contented helps ensure there is a place for all.players of all.abilities to enjoy themselves .

    With regard to sideline parents , I think the team/club need to have a strict policy around this and stop it in its track at an early stage.


  • Registered Users Posts: 403 ✭✭ ax530


    I think it is down to club ethos. I'm involved in sports clubs (not GAA) one has policy of everyone play & enjoy. More matches everyone gets the better competitive aspect can take priority at u18 stage. Know other clubs in same sport which will drop a team if not going to be winning as they have ethos only play the best.
    I am all for participation ahead of winning.
    Greater achievement to get more children involved, enjoying game than a few being ' champions'


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,676 ✭✭✭✭ beauf


    Moshman wrote: »
    Yeah, I know what my opinion is but I also hear the parents (mainly mothers) commenting from the sideline, "why are they playing her?" and encouraging their daughters to kick for points (where Dean Rock would think twice) instead of passing it into the forwards who might be deemed weaker.
    There's obviously a diversity of opinion and I'd be interested to get the thinking behind the opinion that winning is more than than kids development

    I've always been fascinated by this. There is a balance between being competitive and bring inclusive. If it's a friendly game then not being inclusive would be wrong. If it's a final then not being competitive is wrong.

    So it depends on the context. It's also depends on the the level of the team. If it's the A team they are going to be more focused on the competitive aspect, if it's the C or D team then it's more about being inclusive.

    I think GAA is far more inclusive than Soccer. But it will depend on the club. One club might have A,B,C,D teams another might only have one team. Which means you'll have some players in that single team playing above or below their skill level. If you're a D level player in a mostly A level team. It's not going to be easy is it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,676 ✭✭✭✭ beauf


    Then you'll have to consider that 90% if the people involved in sport will never get beyond playing with their club or playing for fun and fitness.

    I think it's why soccer struggles to be competitive nationally. It pushes kids out of clubs by not being inclusive way too early. So when most clubs struggle for players. There is a vast pool of players playing for fun and fitness, just not within football clubs. It means the pool of players for the national team is greatly reduced. Push the kids out, and you push the parents and the money out.

    Which it why GAA is well funded and Soccer isn't.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,676 ✭✭✭✭ beauf


    Moshman wrote: »
    Yeah, I know what my opinion is but I also hear the parents (mainly mothers) commenting from the sideline, "why are they playing her?" and encouraging their daughters to kick for points (where Dean Rock would think twice) instead of passing it into the forwards who might be deemed weaker.
    There's obviously a diversity of opinion and I'd be interested to get the thinking behind the opinion that winning is more than than kids development

    Gaelic has points. Many teams lose because they focus on goals where points are an essential part of the game.

    If a player is being overlooked, that suggests the team is unbalanced. In that case its difficult to cater for that. But they won't improve if they don't get ball time in the game. You have to try get the team to help that player improve.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,492 ✭✭✭ joebloggs32


    All day long this is MOST important.

    Read an article about Corofin recently saying how they dont focus on winning at juvenile , its all about developing players to get them to senior level.

    inevitably some sideline Parents mightn't be a fan of this strategy, same parents wouldn't volunteer a few hours a week and help out with the team either.

    Funnily enough I read a similar article around 2 years ago about Nemo Rangers.
    Now their demographics would be much different to Corofin but their philosophy was the same....player retention and development over underagd success.

    The article stated that they would rarely pick off any minor titles yet they dominate at senior level. It said if they have enough players for two teams they will as best split them as evenly as possible.

    There are many small rural clubs that often seem to punch sbove their weight, and the reason is that all kids get maximum game time as they are working with small numbers, while on the other hand larger urban clubs that pursue success see massive numbers fall off very quickly through the teenage years as players get fed up sitting on the sideline. The late developer never gets to develop.
    On the Offaly hurling team of thd 90s Kevin Kinahan was a 2 time All Star. He didn't even make his school team, the definition of a late developer, but he came from the most rural of clubs, Seir Kieran, which most definitely helped him develop at his own pace.

    There is no coincidence that two of the most successful football clubs in Ireland appear to be following simlar pathways for player development.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,676 ✭✭✭✭ beauf


    salmocab wrote: »
    I’m about to head out the door to coach u6 rugby, it’s the same in every sport some coaches lose sight of what they are meant to be doing. In general I think they mean well but Sometimes they lose the run of themselves. I see it out walking the dog with soccer coaches shouting at defenders to hoof the ball up the pitch with no attempt to use skills.

    There's a flip side to this where players, delay on the ball to play fancy football, and just end up losing it. Forwards never getting the ball passed up to them. Or one side struggles to get the ball out of their half against a stronger team, the whole game compresses into their half.

    I know it'a all about retaining possession and working the ball up. But thats not always possible with a weaker team.


    The long ball strategy has often been criticized as a method that has held back the England national football team. Hughes became the head of coaching at the FA in the 1990s, and used this position to promote his theory of long ball, which followed on from the work of Reep. Hughes and those who defend the tactic claim that time and time again, teams playing direct play have more success.[12] At the 1994 FIFA World Cup, for example, the winning Brazil team scored the most goals from three or fewer passes, while the team to score from a move involving the most passes - the Republic of Ireland - were eliminated in the second round.[12] While multi-pass moves such as those by Brazil against Italy in the 1970 FIFA World Cup Final or Argentina versus Serbia and Montenegro at the 2006 FIFA World Cup are widely lauded as brilliant examples of football,[13] it is partially the rareness of success for such long moves that results in their appreciation and makes them ineffective tactics to attempt to replicate.[citation needed]

    It is however used by teams desperate to score a goal before the end of a match, though this is probably as much due to the lack of time for a gradual build-up as it is for its perceived effectiveness.[14] The long ball technique is also effective in lower level football matches since players lack skill to work as a team and pass the ball accurately up the field. A long ball is a quick counterattacking move and with a fast striker may produce multiple goals.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_ball

    Fallen out of favor.


  • Registered Users Posts: 86 ✭✭ Moshman


    Why don't you volunteer?

    I was waiting for a " why don't you" response. The fact is that I did coach for years and help out when the underage academy was set up in the club but I don't have the time now.
    This doesn't mean that I don't have an opinion on the direction things are going and I'm simply looking for others opinions


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,350 ✭✭✭ threeball


    beauf wrote: »
    There's a flip side to this where players, delay on the ball to play fancy football, and just end up losing it. Forwards never getting the ball passed up to them. Or one side struggles to get the ball out of their half against a stronger team, the whole game compresses into their half.

    I know it'a all about retaining possession and working the ball up. But thats not always possible with a weaker team.





    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_ball

    Fallen out of favor.

    If they can't be comfortable enough on the ball to retain possession then thats a coaching deficit. Maybe in a tiny club with very small numbers you might have some excuse but if a team can get 15 to 20 to training and can't get half of them comfortable enough to not hoof a ball away as soon as they get it then the coaching is poor.
    Most coaches are piss poor and spend their time worrying about winning matches and positional changes rather than getting the fundamentals correct and not giving up on kids when the things you are trying to instill like using a weaker side go wrong. Todays kids can be infuriating with their incredibly short attention spans but wannabe coaches are far worse. Winning should be a by product of good coaching and player development it shouldn't be a clubs focus until at least u16 to u18 when the skills should be locked in.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,492 ✭✭✭ joebloggs32


    A good friend of mine was at a u10 gaelic football match and a young lad tried to kick a ball with his weak foot and missed a score.
    The fool of a coach berated the young lad and told him the next time to make sure and use his strong foot.

    I often find myself boring my lip at underage blitzes as I watch opposition coaches try to ensure they win every mini game instead of letting kids play, and experience different positions during a game. Last year in a u7 hurling game a team we played had one fantastic player. Great to see. He could lift and strike on the run, hit frees and even a sideline cut.
    However, for every free and line ball this kid was instructed to go over and take them and none of his teammates got a chance. It was actually sad to see this kind of behaviour.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 725 ✭✭✭ C.O.Y.B.I.B


    Last year in a u7 hurling game a team we played had one fantastic player. Great to see. He could lift and strike on the run, hit frees and even a sideline cut.
    However, for every free and line ball this kid was instructed to go over and take them and none of his teammates got a chance. It was actually sad to see this kind of behaviour.

    Which is why there is a rule in underage football (ladies) and Camogie that the player nearest the ball takes the sideline,free etc...

    Kicking with the weak foot is something that should be coached from early on and definitely to be applauded when applied in games .


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,350 ✭✭✭ threeball


    Which is why there is a rule in underage football (ladies) and Camogie that the player nearest the ball takes the sideline,free etc...

    Kicking with the weak foot is something that should be coached from early on and definitely to be applauded when applied in games .

    Its in hurling too but its up to coaches to implement it. You don't have an appointed ref up to u10. Its normally just a coach of one of the teams.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,676 ✭✭✭✭ beauf


    threeball wrote: »
    If they can't be comfortable enough on the ball to retain possession then thats a coaching deficit. Maybe in a tiny club with very small numbers you might have some excuse but if a team can get 15 to 20 to training and can't get half of them comfortable enough to not hoof a ball away as soon as they get it then the coaching is poor.
    Most coaches are piss poor and spend their time worrying about winning matches and positional changes rather than getting the fundamentals correct and not giving up on kids when the things you are trying to instill like using a weaker side go wrong. Todays kids can be infuriating with their incredibly short attention spans but wannabe coaches are far worse. Winning should be a by product of good coaching and player development it shouldn't be a clubs focus until at least u16 to u18 when the skills should be locked in.

    You're talking about something else. It's not always about hoofing it in panic. For us is holding on too long and too many short passes is the problem. They are over focused on it from training. Same with shooting, especially shooting from distance, none existent in our teams games. If we meet a team that can score from distance we struggle against them.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,676 ✭✭✭✭ beauf


    ...
    I often find myself boring my lip at underage blitzes as I watch opposition coaches try to ensure they win every mini game instead of letting kids play, and experience different positions during a game. Last year in a u7 hurling game a team we played had one fantastic player. Great to see. He could lift and strike on the run, hit frees and even a sideline cut.
    However, for every free and line ball this kid was instructed to go over and take them and none of his teammates got a chance. It was actually sad to see this kind of behaviour.

    I agree entirely.

    I also dislike when kids are kept in the same positions. They should get an opportunity to play in all positions on a regular basis. They won't improve otherwise.

    Also when the star player is injured or can't make a game your team is crippled. It's also very stressful for players having their first experience in a position under extra stress.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,350 ✭✭✭ threeball


    beauf wrote: »
    You're talking about something else. It's not always about hoofing it in panic. For us is holding on too long and too many short passes is the problem. They are over focused on it from training. Same with shooting, especially shooting from distance, none existent in our teams games. If we meet a team that can score from distance we struggle against them.

    You've said it there yourself. Its the training. The club has to agree to a style of play and every one of the coaches should be developing a part of the style so you start off with the u6 and u8's developing catching, picking and handpassing skills as well as encouraging use of both sides.

    Bring it up a notch for 10s, soloing and kick passing left and right, hand passing left and right, kicking for scores left and right and start to integrate movement as they get more comfortable.

    By 12s you could be establishing a pattern of play, running into space, making yourself available, how to play a position etc.

    Certainly by u14s you should have a style of play ingrained and the fundamentals shouldn't even require much thought for 75% of your players. After that you start getting into tactics, kickouts etc but everything leading up to that should be about developing the skills required to deliver it.

    IMO


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,676 ✭✭✭✭ beauf


    I will say that I'm generally involved in the weaker teams, so its fine that the training is really drilling some concepts over and over. They need it for sure.
    But quite often, we've lost games because we are woeful at one part of the game.
    I think its because a lot of parents and mentors/coaches have never played the game themselves. They really don't get tactics, especially if they aren't working.

    That said I think we've got fantastic coaches and mentors. Really inclusive.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,039 ✭✭✭ fatherted1969


    Can be difficult for parents, children and coaches to transition from go games philosophy where everyone gets equal time on the field to competitive football. If the parents dont buy into what youre doing it can be a nightmare trying to develop children's skills whilst trying to stay competitive. Some parents and coaches suddenly think that winning is all that matters. Its a balancing act but you haven't a hope if the parents don't believe in the long term plan


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,350 ✭✭✭ threeball


    Can be difficult for parents, children and coaches to transition from go games philosophy where everyone gets equal time on the field to competitive football. If the parents dont buy into what youre doing it can be a nightmare trying to develop children's skills whilst trying to stay competitive. Some parents and coaches suddenly think that winning is all that matters. Its a balancing act but you haven't a hope if the parents don't believe in the long term plan

    That's why it needs to be a plan adopted by the club and clearly conveyed to the parents what the plan is. If they don't buy in then that's their problem and they should be free to go elsewhere. Players should be getting plenty of playing time up to u16 at least. If they're not trying a leg, then I'd give them very little but any lad running his socks off and trying to tackle even if hes not great should get plenty of time on the pitch.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,039 ✭✭✭ fatherted1969


    threeball wrote: »
    That's why it needs to be a plan adopted by the club and clearly conveyed to the parents what the plan is. If they don't buy in then that's their problem and they should be free to go elsewhere. Players should be getting plenty of playing time up to u16 at least. If they're not trying a leg, then I'd give them very little but any lad running his socks off and trying to tackle even if hes not great should get plenty of time on the pitch.

    The issue is when you move away from where the scores don't matter to where it does suddenly coaches think theyre the next Jim Gavin. Parents have an expectation that it doesn't matter how interested their child is they should get equal pitch time as the next child. Can be difficult in the more rural clubs where every child is needed but some are not too pushed about it all.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,350 ✭✭✭ threeball


    The issue is when you move away from where the scores don't matter to where it does suddenly coaches think theyre the next Jim Gavin. Parents have an expectation that it doesn't matter how interested their child is they should get equal pitch time as the next child. Can be difficult in the more rural clubs where every child is needed but some are not too pushed about it all.

    Thats my point, its the coaches that are the problem in that situation. A coach should be there to nurture and develop the talent available to the club but that's dependent on
    a. the club being supportive
    b. other coaches doing the same
    c. parents being supportive

    C you can handle if A and B are on board but if A and B aren't then you can forget about it. Most clubs don't have this mentality, then you have clubs like Corofin that do and they reap the rewards while the rest bicker amoungst themselves.


Advertisement