A Little Piece of Knowledge is a Dangerous Thing

Like many coaches in the UK I started at the very bottom of the ladder, entering level 1 of the coach education structure of the Scottish Football Association. The SFA, like many associations  around the world, have implemented a coach education system that forms a pathway in which trainers can enhance their learning. Here is the pathway in its entirety, and the costs associated:

Level 1 - £40

Level 2 - £50

Level 3 - £55

Physical Prep - £72

UEFA C License - £ 228

UEFA B License - £1626

UEFA A License - £2100

UEFA Pro License - £5200

In theory the £9,371 that it would cost a coach to achieve these qualifications pales in comparison to that of a masters or doctorate degree, that could easily stretch into 5 or 6 figures depending on the school attended. To compare the two may seem largely irrelevant, however both are akin to a conclusive standard bearer, that attributes the holder to a position of understanding within a specific field. Many would argue football coaching contradicts the process of progress, as many only complete a few of the regional courses then dip out when the costs increase significantly. Conversely, we see many former professionals who are spooned into the higher levels, without having to complete the introductory stages. This leads me to question if we are truly respecting the process, or are simply using educational courses as symbolic forms of accolades?

At the "grassroots" of the game coach education has been an intrinsic part of our desire to increase standards. In many youth competitions there is now a criteria coaches must meet to simply work with a team, which thankfully has eroded many of the "Socks over track pants" dinosaurs that filled the sidelines in the UK.  As we continue to develop our youth coaches, the FA does need to keep a close eye on the administration of new coaching standards, as a worrying by-product has started to emerge. The coaching course era has witnessed the creation of "Coach Jimmy." You know the guy I mean. Shows up 4 hours before a U9 game to plot out his cunning plan with violent black marker lines scribbled all over plush white boards. He tries to copy Rafa Benitez with weird finger wagging movements when talking to players, and who waxes lyrical about 3rd man runs & overly elaborate patterns of play to 8 year olds. While I am in total harmony with the concept of a base line vocational qualification, this should not detract from the fact coaches at the entry level of the game, are responsible for fostering a love of the game and forming a connection with the sport through enjoyment. As coaching standards improve this should hopefully see an increase in player participation, as more kids should want to play for better coaches. What we cannot afford is to breed a generation of frustrated Adult coaches, trying to re-create the Chelsea 1st team through 11 year olds.

It's been 12 years since I took my SFA level 1, and since then I have been on courses administered by 4 different football associations throughout Europe & North America. During this time I have found myself involved in discussion with many coaches who believe that trainers who once enjoyed professional playing status, are able to be fast tracked through the licensing process. While I don't subscribe to many forms of cynicism, in this instance it's tough to derive any other outcome. Some high profile examples include:

- In 2006 Middlesbrough appointed their former captain as Head Coach, who at the time did not meet the league criteria of a UEFA Pro License. After leaving Middlesbrough The English FA went on to appoint him as Head of Elite Development, having only had 5 years of coaching experience. He now is the Head coach of England's U21 team.

- In 2008 Blackburn Rovers appointed a manager who didn't hold any professional licensing. Special dispensation was granted on the basis he would be grandfathered onto the UEFA Pro License, 3 levels above his current license, and be able to complete the qualification quicker than the original course length of 1 year....He lasted 5 months in the job.

- PFA Scotland (the Professional Footballers Association) now run a coaching symposium through the SFA, which allows professional players to start out at the B License level, for which they also provide financial assistance.

The education system is in place to provide an alignment in standards of teaching, as set by the countries Football Association. Allied to this is the requirement of the coach to attain experience by working with players, and build up a body of work that serves as a tangible portfolio by which further education can enhance. It would therefore seem strange that anyone could substantiate the notion that a former professional should somehow be further along in his development as a coach, when he has little actual coaching experience to draw upon. Coaching is by definition an ability to articulate knowledge, therefore it's a skill set that takes time to enhance and experience to build upon. Regardless of where you enter the Licensing system, it's simply not enough to gain a qualification and expect that to translate into pure ability. The UEFA Pro course is an acceptance based course, therefore if the governing body don't feel you "fit the bill" you cannot gain entry. That criteria aside, one other factor to consider is that the course does not provide any participants with a "Failing Grade." It's teachings are of sound standing I am sure, but is there really any substance to a qualification that doesn't require a testing phase to evaluate competence?

If there's one thing we can all be certain of, it's that without education our world would simply cease to exist. The wheels of industry turn on our ability to enhance our understanding, yet it's our application of experience that binds the working parts together. Football's evolution will continue to propel at an expeditious rate, therefore it's vital that those at the top of the game trust in coaches who have applied themselves to being part of that evolution. If we are to truly increase the density of our football footprint, we as a nation have to place more emphasis on the learning process, versus the learning outcome. We as educators need to look beyond the pre-requisites' and the minimum standards and pursue goals that far exceed the norm. In turn we will provide our players with transformative learning that can motivate a generation to conceptualize the game more efficiently, and revel in the journey to betterment.

"We learn by pushing ourselves, and finding out what lies at the outer reaches of our abilities."

Josh Waitzkin

The Numbers Game

We live in a world where numbers are everything. From the per capita ratio's to which we grade our economies, to the algorithms scientists construct when searching for automated reasoning. They're the basis in how we formulate structure, sequence and can even be found in how we analyze performance. Statistical evidence is becoming more prevalent in football, but one compilation of figures remain at the heart of the game...and it's in what we call "formations."

Formations are the starting point for many who wish to learn to articulate the game, and for the most part is a solid grounding in how the game functions. 3-4-3, 4-4-2, 4-5-1, 4-3-3, we've seen them all; but while there are thinkers on earth, we'll undoubtedly see variations crop up from time to time. With a football fanbase growing by the second, our game has a wealth of resource available to anyone who wishes to delve deeper into each systems nuances. At the click of a button we can access endless TV companies coverage of specific instances, and before our very eyes we have beautifully presented breakdown of each players movement and how that relates to the overall team shape. Where they started, where they went, where they should have went....it's presented normally as fact rather than conjecture, but never the less, those watching now feel more informed as a result. What's becoming slightly worrying, is the growth of the "educated" football fan has brought an air of confidence that is often unsubstantiated. Some feel obliged to comment on a particular manager's "Tactical Naiveity" for example. Petulance aside, has our game become too much about the numbers & not focused enough on how we actually set out to win the game? Have we became clouded as a nation as to what "Tactics" and "Formations" really are, and what the numbers actually translate into? In this piece I intend to challenge how we should shift our attention onto how we achieve our goals, rather than what instrument we use to get there.

Methodology: a system of methods used in a particular area of study or activity.

In football coaching terms methodology is derived from a portfolio of experience, education & ability to communicate. A methodology that is implemented effectively manifests itself into a strategy that is a bridge between concept and reality.

To highlight some instances of methodology I'd like share a small extract from Dennis Bergkamp's autobiography, Stillness & Speed.

"Cruyff's coaching is based on how he was as a player; adventurous, spectacular and offensive. He doesn't analyze so much, it's more instinct & technique. Van Gaal is didactic, he gives his players instructions they need to perform to make the system work; as the system is sacred."

Bergkamp's experience tells of his time at Ajax where he played under both Van Gaal & Cruyff. Clearly two very different coaches, yet both achieved a similar level of success. What's important to remember is that both coaches employed the clubs favored system of play (3-4-3/4-3-3 variant). Therefore the structure was largely the same, however what's abundantly clear is how each coach managed to gain success through their own methodology.

Van Gaal's ability to process & transfer information is on par with any coach that has or will likely operate in the sport. Deploying such an in depth systematic approach relies heavily on his ability to build a format that players can adhere to, but more importantly transmit this in such a fashion that players comprehend clearly. Cruyff's coaching style has been replicated by many, but truly mastered by none. His ability to show belief in his players has allowed him to cultivate success through individual brilliance, and build into others qualities that he himself embodied. Cruyff challenged his players to draw confidence from their superior technique, but also afforded them the opportunity to play with freedom and trust their own judgment.

Both coaches demonstrate that there is more than one way to skin the proverbial cat, however to return to the notion that somehow their team system or formation predicates how their team operates, is one we should consider closely. Van Gaal's principles & style of play differ greatly from Cryuff, yet both of their Ajax teams stood in the same starting positions each week. Lets suggest for a moment that they did differ, 4-4-2 vs a 4-5-1 lets say....Van Gaal's wingers will still track back a little more, and Cruyff's full backs will still be more adept to filtering forward during attacks. These coaches are examples of men that have not only developed a successful methodology, but have also attributed a level of ability that allows them to imprint their style of play across many platforms. They don't feel shackled by a pre-set formation of numbers, that in turn decides which way the team should operate.

What we must work hard to do is to re-program how we envisage systems of play, and instead conceptualize how a framework can be enhanced by a style of play. Moving to a 4-5-1 shouldn't instantly transmit we want to "Shut up shop." There are a whole host of variations out there if we as coaches are willing to challenge our own ideas. Guardiola's Bayern Munich have played the vast majority of this season in a nontraditional 4-5-1, with Ribery & Robben taking up deeper starting positions at Right & Left midfield. This often affords then more space to cut inside onto their favored dominant foot, and draw pressure from further away, creating larger holes in the opposition back line. Neither are really known for their defensive qualities, nor is Guardiola for that matter, but if a deeper starting position gets them on the ball more often then why not? Moving to a back 3 is a concept that frightens a lot of my generation of coaches, simply as many were not around to see this set up in its previous incarnation. No fullbacks? Surely not? How would we do that then?.....I hear you cry. Juventus are the flagship of a team that provide a true "back 3" set up. Antonio Conte's recent 3-3-4 variant is one that better tacticians than I are probably better served to offer a clearer insight on. What is clear to me however is that there is a renewed impetus toward setting up in a back 3, such is the want for an increase in fluid attacking play.

I leave you with a quote from the great Sun Tzu

“Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory.
Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.”
                      --Sun Tzu, c.544-496 BCE (traditional); Chinese Military General; Strategist and Philosopher --

The Hero & The Manager

.....We've all done it. Sat there at a game as the announcer reads out the line ups, through that muffled acoustic which seems synonymous only with British football grounds, and In your head tried to piece together where each player will play. Images of blank tactic boards being filled with darting lines & bending arrows, compile a series of mental profiling that goes on until the match starts. Finally you can start to break things down visually, and analyze player traits and assess individual & collective performance. At half time if the team are down a goal or two, the poor sole sitting next to you is forced to cop an ear full of tactical vehement, symbolic in our own minds to that of a young Churchill plotting an allied assault on the opposition. The game finishes with little more than a whimper in the second half, and you trudge out the stadium kicking empty bovril cups in anger, with a head full of "What was the gaffer thinking picking him" & "I would have done X,Y & Z differently." Off now to the local watering hole where I might sit with other's echoing my discontent, further verifying that we all know better and that the manager should take a leaf from our book.

This may seem all too familiar to many a football fanatic, as it's been a factor in watching the game since the dawn of time. If we're honest it’ll probably continue to be the case for many years to come, but why has our game developed a generation of football fans who seem hell bent on taking the-afore mentioned a step further? Why do our supporters revel in the "You don't know what you're doing" chant, when many of them may share that same quality. Football fandom has retained a number of characteristics throughout the years, but in recent times a sub-culture of spectator has developed, who en mass seem able to defy logic and administer "information" into fact without a glimmer of doubt.

As short term-ism's grip on the neck of professional football tightens by the minute, it's become as tough a task as any to truly make your mark on a football club these days. The "results business", as our media have lovingly labeled our top flight, has brought a heightened level of spotlight to our game since the EPL boom of the early 90's. The vast array of panel style productions that populate the airwaves have created a shift in how football fans process match footage, and in turn formulate general opinion. We are served up a series of pre & post game footage, often deposed in bite sized vignettes, that lead to the creation of a narrative that is further hammered home by the former pro’s who spoon feed it to us. Many of these "talking points" have already been pre-selected & are duck taped together with all the by-partisan verve of a right wing party political broadcast! Often when a manager is under pressure his tactical outlays are highlighted more notably. The camera seems to find a way to give more lens space to a managers reaction in the heat of a particularly poor refereeing decision, as if it were his bad luck that created the situation in the 1st place. Finally...and this one's my favorite....when a managers team concedes a goal, the camera instantly zooms to a shot of said coach standing angered with his arms folded and a furrowed brow. The announcer further compounds the situation by stating something along the lines of, "When your lucks out, nothing seems to go for you." I can't remember a manager in the history of the game being happy when his team conceded a goal, but somehow it seems more relevant to include that shot when his team is on a bad run of results.

The byproduct of this form of media is the creation of a populous who conform to a mindset largely dictated to them. Before I go all "area 51" on you with my conspiracy theories, no I don't believe media companies have it in for football clubs, nor do they wish to condemn certain individuals. That said sport is often lauded as theatre, so the broadcast media seem obliged to provide their viewership with the most dramatic experience available. So are we all just getting caught up in the moment and not deciphering the facts correctly? It would seem that with many individuals that we are, and as such we need to re-program how we perceive performance at the top level.

Football is a creative & inspirational sport but, like any long term endeavor, it does not always bear instant fruit. Picking a winning 11 to many is the pinnacle of management, but in isolation it represents a fairly low % of what will contribute to a club's long term success. Clearly it helps to create winning football teams, but to be done so efficiently is to create a dynasty of success, versus a bank rolled starting line-up that are forged together in the search for the next 3 points. Our reactionary measures to what we label "failures" are contributing little to the future of a game that is currently in a state of repair in the UK. We as fans should never doubt the power we have at our disposal, but it's in the hands of the managers to offer deliverables that culminate success. Collectively we can all contribute to a system that allows a new manager the time & the foundation to fully immerse themselves into the football club, and imprint their philosophy across the whole organization. There are some unbelievable coaches in the world today, many of which possess the qualities to improve any club at the top level. What currently prohibits them from doing so is a systematic chain of insecurities that range from a lack of trust from the fan base to try the unknown, to a board/owner group that feel the need to service the fans desires, and therefore select a coach based on the most popular name in the hat versus the most talented. With such a highly populated body politic as many of our top clubs have acquired, it may be trivial of me to suggest that they could unite in a common cause such as this. However it's for us as fans to explore the notion, and at the very least believe it can happen.