At 6's and 7's

In my last blog I talked about 8-a-side soccer and how important I think it is to the development of players. In this blog I would like to talk about soccer at the U9 and U10 level.  Twelve months ago at Lower Island we decided to recommend that at these ages we play 6-a-side soccer as opposed to the 7-a-side version.  Does it really matter whether we have six on a team or seven on a team I hear you ask, does it really make a great deal of difference in the bigger picture?

To be fair, I felt that way until I took a closer look and compared the two formats in terms of numbers on the field, the shape of the team, the disconnection of players on the field and the bigger picture of mini soccer. After a closer look, I am of the opinion that the 6-a-side game is much better for the players than its 7-a-side cousin.

First of all, the numbers on the field: This is a pretty straightforward issue for me. Why have 14 on the field when you can easily have 12. Two less players on the field will increase the opportunities for players to get touches on the ball and getting around the ball is what it’s all about. At the same time if we keep the field the same size then we should increase the amount of physical activity that we provide to the players. This is of vital importance to our young children and a key component of Long Term Athlete Development. I don’t believe that we are doing enough to help keep our children healthy and removing two players from the space opens up more space for the children to run into. That’s a step in the right direction.

The next thing to address, which is related more to development of the player as opposed to physical activity, is the shape of the teams in the games I have seen. With 6 outfield players we often see the 2-2-2 formation in the 7-a-side game. Its mini soccer after all and we really don’t need the sophisticated deep lying striker or holding midfielder at these ages. Having said that, 2 in the back 2 up top and 2 in the middle automatically put players into boxes on the field with very little, if any, movement up and down the field by the players. The team is balanced, but balanced north-south and this bears no resemblance to the real game we are getting them ready for which needs balance east-west.  On top of that we have added a ‘third line’ to the team and in my opinion its way too early for that.

With 5 out field players in the six-a-aside version of the game we often see the hockey formation of 2 in the back and 3 up front. Because many of our coaches are more familiar with hockey this is the default formation in Canada. I have to confess that when I first moved to Canada I couldn’t understand why the two defenders were tied to the halfway line, until I first watched Hockey Night in Canada. Now if we make a slight change to this formation and have 3 in the back and 2 forwards we are on the right track. When it comes to the shape of the team and how to explain it to the players, I have to credit Prospect Lake TD Mark Bell with this great idea. It’s a smiling face. The two forwards are the eyes and the three defenders make the smile, with the central defender always behind the two wider defenders. The key now is to get the smiling face move together up and down the field! In terms of the big game the shape offers the concepts of width and depth to young players and the smiling face shape is easy for them to see on the field. If it’s easier for them then it will be easier for the coach to explain to the players. The simpler we make it for the players and coaches the better the experience will be.

The disconnection of players on the field is directly related to the number of players on the field. In every 7-a-side game I have seen there are players on the field who have no connection to the game that is going on around them. They don’t get near the ball and they tend to stay in one small area. No touches on the ball and no physical activity, and we wonder why our numbers drop and why we aren’t developing players! There is no fun in watching, the fun is in the playing. If it’s not fun they won’t come back.

Finally, in terms of the small sided game from U8 to U12, we play 4-a-side at U8 and 8-a-side at U12. The jump from 8-a-side to 11-a-side at U13 is a big jump and many players have difficulty with the addition of players and the bigger space. If the addition of 3 players is a big challenge from U12 to U13 then the similar addition of three players from 4-a-side to 7-a-side from U9 to U10 is surely too much to ask. If we graduate the addition of players through the age groups without big jumps then we make the game easier for the players to adapt to. Adding two players from 4-a-side to 6-a-side to 8-a-side is a more balanced approach than going from 4 to 7 to 8. If they come back after two years of 4-a-side then we have a chance to make them soccer players. Why complicate matters by adding three players to the mix when two will do nicely.

So, for me it’s the 6-a-side game that gets my vote, more space on the field, more touches on the ball and an easier game for the players to understand.

On a final note and related to the difficult move from 8-a-side to 11-a-side, when I worked in the UK we didn’t jump from 8 to 11 until after Christmas of the U13 year to give them a little more time to get used to the idea. Can you imagine the problems we would have here if we changed the format of the games program midway through a season!