Cowshed

There were abusers abusing children, and that is what these people are abusing children prior to covid, or a changing economy. The game was already losing thousands more refs than it recruited due to abuse and poor behaviour. Its been an increasing wide ranging problem for years. Politically we are ignoring it. Politically we dont ignore the abuse of pro players who are a tiny minority versus the long standing phenom nationally in grass roots football.

The Avon youth league has cancelled all U16 games across all divisions this Sunday due to poor behaviour including parents threatening players on the pitch.

How many teams in the championship, or at elite levels dont use hybrid systems? Those decisions are pragmatism.

The errors are collective. The errors and its multiple errors are the zonal markers are too deep and the lack of blocking and players goal side to effect runners. The scorer doesnt have to work that hard to score. If that zonal line (?) steps a metre the picture changes.

You wont be able to quantify that. Because the former can be used to protect the ball winners. Man marking takes the best headers out of the game. Some teams can block off the ball winners or mark them, which some teams called pinning. You dont defnd purely on marking man to man. It is relatively easy to combastv and create mismatches etc.

If Kalas doesn't intervene it's an easy catch. To say he should punch it with no opposition players are anywhere near is ludicrous. The player didnt catch it. He is entering a line, a high line and the outcome? The whys he should punch. Absolute nonsense. See 1960maan's photo posted a couple of posts below. Kalas and Martin were always going to get in each other's way. Scott might have too if he hadn't reacted to MOL's shout. The shape was fine.There were enough players to deal with ball. They did not need more, If the Keeper stays the opposition do not score.

You do not catch a ball when entering a line. The keeper should punch it. Why because of the variables and the result underlines it. Runners where not tracked and ball watching. The cross was superb. Starts compact and in a line, and leaves because of the Keeper going. The shape was fine v a straight ball until the keeper intervenes.

Check his feet. Double step before jumping means he cannot jump efficiently as he loses momentum, and that quells downward force to explode upwards. The keeper is entering a high line. Its not a straightfoward catch. He never gets high enough to use a straightforward catching technique (W). In traffic punch. The keeper should be cleaning all out, and he cant because of his feet. A question I would ask about this goal, as I did about the first. Why is there a spare unmarked man at the back/left hand post ? I'm not quite sure what your referring to.

Do I want my keeper interferiing with a high line? No. Do I want my keeper controlliing the space behind a high line? Yes. Two differing things. If the keeper stays at home the game is not lost. I could break down the technique used, the position of hands, the steps, and the lack of intensity x spring in the jump. The keeper failed. The game is lost. That in modern parlance is the outcome. Its a rubbish outcome.

Brave is subjective. Thats an intent. An approach, A principle of play. They are never wholly separate issues because the teams and individuals mindsets follows their confidence in their ability to carry out their tasks within the team intent and principles. Principles are bold. They are what the team ARE. The opening post highlighted a positive in City’s play. City do penetrate teams from low possession %. Possession is risked to play forwards quickly. That is bold and brave. So players are bold and brave at those tasks but not at others? The answer is frequently individual ability. Tactical is a how high is that line? Are lines always that high? Why could be the technical. City have not been controlling deeper lines either. Its very poor, a Lordy wtf was that moment, but it was different and I would expect emphasis in training to focus on roles -You control, that, you don't come out here and thats is your role there etc. There is a point here about episodic and periodized training feeding confidence but it will still go back to players abilities.

We may or we might not. When a defensive line is that high do you want your keeper to contest a ball with his own team mates. I would not.

That is not necessarily a psychological problem. The team players may not have the ability to consistently deal with the physical. There ability feeds tactical flexibility to control the physical. If the former is not present that then has an impact on mindset. Being braver in possession works in a similar manner. Mindset follows ability. Decision making follows ability.

Bristol City lads have been there before for a game v Brazil and? Drank in a gated complex for tourists. Drinking alcohol was restricted and it is exceptionally expensive. Years later. Drinking alcohol is stiil restricted and it is exceptionally expensive. It will be unlike any other tournament.

Citys keepers are consistently asked to stay. The keepers do not routinely ignore instruction. City get compact and generally drop when defending balls in obvious areas of the pitch. This means there is less space between the keeper and defenders for the keeper to control, and more traffic to get through for the keeper. The outcome has to be the keeper doesnt come for crosses consistently, and should not unless its in their zone.. The keeper coach is highly unlikely to advise Mr Pearson. The keeper coach is there to work on the intent of the Manager - They do what they are told.

Skill is defined in coaching as something you can perform on demand. A few tricks and performing inconsistently is not being skillful.

Refs are constantly reviewed. Refs receive external feedback from clubs. It is a small part of evaluation and progression and otherwise. A referee does not progress or stay at the peak of the game by having failings. External feedback frequently is not of high quality. Feedback (?) frequently is not evidence based or constructive. In regards to laws of the game IFAB are responsible not the FA etc.

The FA run open forums for coaches, Managers and clubs. Primarily for rule changes. They are quite open. Whats the point of external feedback? If referees fall below standards they are demoted.

I do not the Premier league officials limited, the FA, and the intenational body IFAB do.

I didn't post an apology. The development process to become a referee is rigorous and referess now make less quantifiable mistakes than they did ten years ago. Refereeing efficiency is measured and standards are high. Championship ref efficiency compares favourably to that of counterparts across Europe, so unless the standard of refereeing across Europe has dropped (it has not) standards are not shit as you put it.

It isn't. The standard of refs is of a higher standard due to the rigourous development process.

You do not need supreme fitness to create neural pathways. The process requires repetition. The quality of the repetition enhances the process and this can mean a individual in football doesnt have to have beyond a moderate fitness level to create skill. Myelination is enhanced by intensity of training (football), its focus v physicality, and this then internalises the task. Off tangent .. Myelination can be stimulated by visualisation.

Exactly. Thats an external factor, Humans have not changed. He would still possess the characteristics of what made him exceptional. The keystone qualities have not altered. Our understanding of training methodology has. Charlton exceptional talent would be accentuated with modern football training, as would be any other individual. Yes the characteristics of what made them professional footballers has not changed. Their qualities would still be vital to their progress. The players would be improved further. These players created their great. The extrinsic and intrinsic drivers of what made them great remains in any era. What we see is people dont think think about how players became great. Its not arbitrary dictated by an age. Great players have distinguishing factors that transend any era, growth mindset, fight response, how humans acquire and create their skills , how axons work, myelination occurs doesnt change.

Charlton was not a good player. He was a great one. You appear to be saying that a player at the zenith of the game could not make it now because humans are now different?

Central midfielders in Charlton time generally ran sub five miles, it’s now frequently beyond six, that is not x 10. Skill isn't overtly physical, it’s the result of deliberate practice and its neural, humans create muscle memory via training and repetition. To have the skill set Charlton possessed the player has to have a growth mindset to create his skill level. Skill is a nurtured talent that can be performed on demand. To state a exceptional player then wouldn’t be now is a rather odd argument because the driver of why these players were exceptional is being removed. If the player was advanced across aspects of technical, tactical, physical, psychological well they would still be advanced now. Todays human is not a new species.

It’s a consideration of team intent. The probability of losing possession in challenging areas impacts decisions. Throwing the ball up the line keeps the team in a defensive shape. There the primary focus is not retaining possession because players won’t be in relational distances to the ball to receive and retrain it, they will be in positions to defend the ball. Possession based teams will behave differently because the focus from throw ins is possession, and the opportunity this provides v the impact (fear) of losing the ball. Training. Throw ins are not necessarily a other thing. The relational distances of wanting to keep the ball are little different to goal kicks and free kicks. Angles, diamonds, triangles are superior to flat and vertical if you want to keep the ball consistently.,