It's Time for USYSA to Do the Right Thing

By Scott Placek
President
Futsal Association of South Texas

For years we have heard USYSA pay lip service to the idea that small
sided games are best for the development of our youth players. Nobody
with any training or experience in the coaching of young players would
disagree with that statement. People may argue over the right ages,
the right numbers, or the right rules, but few people would disagree
that more playing time, more touches and more small sided situations
experienced at a young way produces better, more creative and more
confident young players when they step onto the outdoor pitch.

The USYSA issued a position paper recently answering many of the
questions raised by people resistant to small sided games. The
rationale put forth by USYSA is instructive:

Why make the change?

It makes the game of soccer a better experience for children. More
touches on the ball, more opportunities to make decisions, more actual
play. Energetic workouts due to playing both attacking and defensive
roles. While learning both offense and defense, a player will become
more complete and will understand more readily the roles and
importance of teammates.

(Source: www.usyouthsoccer.org/downloads/
national_office/SmallSidedGames.pdf)

In his small sided presentation, Tom Goodman, USYSA National Director
of Coaching Education, answers the question "Why Small Sided?"

His answers:

1) Because we want our young soccer players to make more, less
complicated decisions during the game! More opportunities to
scheme... As we play we must constantly change and adapt to our
surroundings. This challenge is the basis for tactics. How do we solve
the puzzle?

2 )More opportunity to solve problems that only the game can present.

3) Players cannot hide or get lost in the small-sided environment. It
helps improve competitiveness & aggressiveness.

He also answers "What can we teach?"

Team Shape. In larger numbers bad "shape" is hidden. The Principles
of the game are much easier to see for coaches and players.

(Source: www.usyouthsoccer.org/docs/ ssg%20powerpoint%20(goodman).ppt)

Again, Goodman's reasoning is sound, appropriate and a fine guide for
the development of young players. However, USYSA's commitment to
these laudable goals is undercut by its continued support and
endorsement of America's unique perversion of the world's game - -
arena style indoor soccer with walls. USYSA continues to sanction,
register and insure this "sport" for its young players. Despite the
fact that elements of indoor game contradict USYSA's stated rationale
for small sided games, USYSA continues to take the money offered by
indoor centers for player registrations.

Let's examine some of the points USYSA and Goodman make.

• More opportunities to make decisions. This is clearly a fine point.
However, what is the quality of the decision? Outdoor fields don't
have walls. When you play with walls, your decisions are totally
different. You can "tie up" and defend an opponent with the wall
alone. Other players don't have to worry about providing cover.
That's the second principle of defense: Pressure, Cover, Balance. In
the indoor walled game, we immediately lose the second principle in
many defending situations. Is that the kind of decision making we
want to encourage. What about attacking principles? Penetration,
support, mobility and width. How often do see indoor players pass to
themselves off walls, or whack a ball off an end wall to an oncoming
player. Doesn't work in the outdoor game, and the decision that leads
to that approach is not one to be encouraged.
• While learning both offense and defense, a player will become more
complete and will understand more readily the roles and importance of
teammates. Again a proper goal. But the indoor walled game
diminishes the roles of teammates and because of the walls, negates
the ability to understand cover on defense, diminishes the importance
of good supporting positions in attack, and because of the end walls,
takes away many of the tactical approaches needed to advance the ball
upfield in the outdoor game.
• More opportunity to solve problems only the game can present.
Again, when is the last time the outdoor game gave you a wall to use
in defending an opponent. When was the last time the outdoor game
presented a ball rebounding from a wall by the goal? When is the last
time the outdoor game let you hit a wild crossfield pass knowing that
the ball would bounce back and stay in play?
• Players cannot hide or get lost in the small-sided environment.
Unless it is indoor walled soccer. Then the player doesn't need to
cover or support his teammates. The player doesn't need to link into
attack going forward, they can wait for the ball to bounce back to them.

The inconsistency between small sided objectives and indoor soccer is
manifest. Sure a few of the benefits carry over. The attacking 1v1
and the increased touches are both present, but at what cost? The
benefits are quickly outweighed by the inculcation of poor tactical
decisions. Goodman and USYSA are both insistent that small sided
games are necessary to teach players decision making skills that will
benefit them throughout their outdoor soccer careers. Yet USYSA
continues to sanction and profit from indoor soccer registrations.

It is worthy to mention that the vast majority of indoor soccer
centers and registrations are for profit ventures. The profit motive
certainly detracts from any objective evaluation of the benefits and
risks to youth players by those indoor operators. Apparently USYSA is
also unwilling to undertake that calculus. The benefits are clearly
limited, come with unavoidable tactical detriments, and unfortunately
come with significant injury risks. Tim Burns, a London economist and
youth soccer development officer, refers to "the phenomenal rate of
injuries experienced in the dasher board game." During the 1990's
Benemarc, an insurance broker, administered both the Futsal insurance
program and the programs for many USYSA members, including North Texas
and South Texas. In one meeting, their representative told me that
although indoor registrations account for only 10% of USYSA
registrations in their programs, it accounted for 90% of the claims.
In contrast, Futsal's loss experience and claims rate was the same as
outdoor soccer.

It is time for USYSA to do the right thing. USYSA had no hesitance in
imposing a top down decision to adopt small sided games, including 8v8
for younger select players. The reason: it's best for the player.
Why then, does USYSA hesitate to end its support of walled indoor
soccer?

FIFA, the international governing body that USYSA purportedly
operates under faced a distinct decision in the mid-80s. The adoption
of an indoor soccer game was the issue and the choices were simple.
Americans pushed for the adoption of the dasherboard game. South
Americans pushed for futsal, a game that had been around for over 50
years and was credited with the development of many of soccer's
greatest legends. Given the history and benefits of futsal, FIFA had
an easy time making its choice. Why is it so hard for USYSA?

USYSA need only look to some of its own leaders for advice. Graham
Ramsay, Director of Coaching for the Maryland State Youth Soccer
Association penned a fine article by the name of "Soccer Walls Do Not
a Player Make." In this article, Ramsay saw the connection between
small sided games and futsal – and the dangers of the walled game
supported by USYSA. Why is it so hard for USYSA to do the right thing?

Locally, there is no need for clubs or state associations to wait for
USYSA to start looking out for the players. Clubs are starting to
introduce futsal ahead of USYSA. In Dallas, the Comets, Dallas Inter
and Longhorns youth soccer clubs have introduced futsal competition.
(Source: http://www.cometssoccer.com/Skills-Futsal.htm ,
http://www.longhorns.org/content/?CatId=108 ,
http://www.dallasinter.org/academy.htm)
North Texas State Soccer Association sanctions two futsal leagues (and
unfortunately 12 walled indoor playing facilities (www.ntxsoccer.org).
In South Texas, El Paso has youth and adult futsal. Austin is
preparing to re-introduce its futsal league, which once numbered 1300
players. In Austin, much of the organization is being provided by
outdoor clubs.

The player development benefits of futsal are uncontroverted. Its
similarity to the outdoor game is transparent. The risks and downside
of the walled game are well chronicled. USYSA should not wait a
moment longer to implement its "top down" philosophy of doing what is
best for player development.

USYSA should bar all state associations from registering players for
walled indoor soccer. It should act to give life and meaning to a
decade old agreement between USYSA and US Futsal to unite the bodies
at the state level. This step alone would go a long way towards
satisfying critics of US Futsal's national officers. The structure
and support available through the USYSA state associations would
minimize the responsiveness issue immediately. If USYSA won't do it,
the clubs and state associations should give "bottom up" management a
try. Reject walled indoor registrations. Join the rest of the world
in recognizing futsal as THE indoor soccer game. If it really is all
about what is best for the kids, then it's time to do the right thing.
If USYSA won't do it, its state associations and clubs should take
the lead.

About the Author: Scott Placek is the president of the Futsal
Association of South Texas (www.stxfutsal.org) and serves on two
committees for the US Futsal Federation. A former NCAA college head
coach, Scott holds national coaching licenses from US Soccer and the
NSCAA. He is a former ODP State Team Head Coach and has been a member
of the Arkansas State Soccer Association Coaching Education Staff. A
former Director of Coaching for a select soccer club in Austin, Texas,
Scott founded Austin Futsal and oversaw its growth to 1300 players in
a three year period.

©2004 Scott Placek. This article may be freely reproduced with the
copyright notice. Please notify the author of its use via e-mail at
scott@....