ing 5v5SSG for advaced players

[bigpete86]

The title shoud say Using 5v5 SSG for advanced player's

I like the use of 5v5 games in training they have worked well for me when working with some of the more advanced players who need to be sharpened in terms of fitness and technique and advanced aspects of play.Reducing the play to 5v5 allows for all of the aspects present in 11 v11 to be coached thus creating better results faster which become more consistent with practice.

5v5 is good for developing players as it allows then to do many things such as allowing frequent touches of the ball, reinforcing possession and regaining of possession as an enjoyable aspect of play,develops fitness,presents chances to score goals often, develops fast decision making and is easily adaptable to suit various coaching objectives.Goal keepers can also be coached.

Use a basic area of 50yards length by 30 yards width this can be changed depending on what type of game the coach like to develop if the coach likes to develop lots of forward running and passing penetration then the pitch can be made more narrow and longer or if the coach would like to to spread the play the pitch can be made wide with various conditions for crossing. Constrict the play to condition confidence in small areas and make the area large to condition lay in larger areas of space.

This is good because changing the environment means that players must be alert to changes on the pitch and learn to problem solve.

The role the coach should play in this format is merely a facilitator who decides the constricts of the game this allows to the players to enjoy their learning more and at the same time learn more as they are thinking more. Due to the advanced nature of the players there is no need for highly regimented technique training in the same way as development, training should be focused on ticking the players over and challenging the players under pressure situations which can occur during a game.

This is also a good format to Evaluate the players by asking questions such as;

If players are comfortable and confident playing against an opponent individually (dribbling).
If players are capable of maintaining possession of the ball both as individuals and as a group.
If players can create opportunities to score goals both individually and as a group.
If players are successful at scoring goals.
If players are composed while trying to regain possession of the ball (defending).
If players can adapt to the unexpected and adjust their behavior and improvise appropriately.

When the team has possession of the ball it can learn:

Employing different build up plays using a variety of different passing such as using the width or being direct,learn to determine effective team shape such as diamond when in a group of four,create individual or team scoring chances, learn correct dribbling and turning and also develops intelligence.

When the team is not in possession of the ball it can learn:

Regain the ball fast,man marking tackling and simple principles of defensive play.

Decision making is developed concentrating on when to dribble when to pass,when to take risk,evaluating the change of play, and technique selection such as when to shoot,pass dribble or change the direction or play.Psychology can also be coached during the game such as aggression,confidence.

All normal rules of play must be applied no matter what challenges are used.

Fitness can also be trained by changing number of touches and placing conditions on how much a player runs on different pitch sizes etc. Using zones and man to man marking will also improve fitness.

The games are focused on tweaking decision in small group tactics while maximising the chances of a player to learn through high touch play.

To encourage players to think quickly minimise the time between change over of topic's. When using this method it is best to divide aspects of play into catagories for training then pick your 5 most effective for each catagory, these can then be used with a variety of conditions. I try to make it so that the conditions are more challenging.

Does any one else have anything to add to this? I have left out the challenges I use as providing a format for you to put your own onto may be more useful.

I have aimed this at new coaches here as this provided me with a base for developing global training games, to condition many factors at the same time in a challenging envirinment which still allows players to enjoy intense training. Also as you may have guessed it leave alot of learning to the players, the aim is to get skilled players to think on the ball and develop game intelligence through discovering solutions to problems therefore the approach is more problem solving than aything else. The games should build the players up to be able to think fast at very hoigh speed of play.

This has been useful as a format for me hope it has some use here.

Feel free to ask anymore questions about how I use this format.

[bigpete86]

Just to clear this up I put this on here for new coaches who may want to learn about the adavantages of 5v5.

[Coachkev]

Pete,
Although I can understand why you posted this, remember it IS just your opinion.

Its funny you have posted this, I felt the same way in my early coaching days. I used to use 5v5, but have found that the best and fastest transition from actual training to integration into play in matches is from 3v3.

From 3v3 you can have all the tactics, individual technical elements and under far more constant pressure than you will find in 5v5.

5v5 is much better suited (in my opinion) to practising tactical pattern play where the 3 units of a team (defence midfield and attack) need more players to create the realism of true match play

[Charlie]

Coach Kev, I think you said that just to make a topic actually "discussable"!

(yes sometimes I come from the George W Bush school of English!)

4v4 is recognised as the smallest number of players required to mimic the full size game. This provides you with the concepts of both width and depth, a concept you wont get with 3v3.

[Coachkev]

Originally Posted by Charlie

Coach Kev, I think you said that just to make a topic actually "discussable"!

(yes sometimes I come from the George W Bush school of English!)

4v4 is recognised as the smallest number of players required to mimic the full size game. This provides you with the concepts of both width and depth, a concept you wont get with 3v3.

Really???..........So a Defensive Triangle doesnt have width or depth?
And an Attacking Triangle doesnt have width or depth?..... O...k...a..y

4v4 is recognised purely because of the success the Dutch have had within their obsession with 4-3-3 formation.

3v3 can easily adopt width and depth...

A1....................................A2 << width

.....................D1 << depth





.....................A3 <<< depth

...D2...................................D3 << width


Mmmmmmmm some people cannot see the woods for the trees

[DB1]

Agree with Charlie 4 gives the extra dimension to replicate the full picture,

.........XA1

XA2.......... XA3

.........XA4

1 long, 1 short, 2 wide

[Archie Graham]

Yup, I'm kinda with the 4 vs 4 boys on this. Through theory and through practice.

However..... I often find myself running drills that are 2 vs 2 and 3 vs 3 more often than 4 vs 4 (yes, I know we are talking about ssg here, bear with me).

This is usually because I'm trying to get a session topic across to my players. Coaching Cover Play, for example, is easier with 2 vs 2 than with more players at an early stage of 'understanding' (in my opinion).

But I agree - 4 vs 4 gives width on BOTH sides (r flank & l flank) as well as depth (backs) and length (forwards). If you want the text book then the FA coach that this formation can be identified in all areas of the pitch with a 11 vs 11 set up. But this is spurious at best because you could also identify other formations - 3 vs 3, 5 vs 5 etc.

Yes, if you are looking to mimic the dynamics of a 'full sided' game then 4 vs 4 works. But you could argue that you need a fifth player to play in the middle to represent the midfield option and linking play. You could argue that 4 vs 4 encourages the ball to be played out of the back straight to the forward(s) and by passes the midfiled. It depends how you view the purpose of a 4 vs 4.

One of the undeniable advantages of SSG whether 4 vs 4 or slightly more or less players, is that the players get more touches of the ball. This has to be a good thing.

Jury still out then?