ContinueWe use cookies to ensure that you get the best experience on our website; if you continue without changing your settings - or dismiss this message - we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on Forums.Football Web


Return to front page

Newest article: Re: Mark Sampson: Stevenage caretaker charged with… by bcb1994Today 13:35Today at 13:35:03view thread

Oldest article: Bury Fallout by dippers17/9 18:16Sat Sep 7 18:16:06 2019view thread


Next thread: It's a first well at least for me it is.. by Northstandbloke18/9 17:10Wed Sep 18 17:10:36 2019view thread

Re: You reap what you sow

By AgentEves18/9 20:21Wed Sep 18 20:21:18 2019In response to Re: You reap what you sow

Views: 329

"Hope this doesn't come across as anti-Sampson or anti-womens football."

No, all good.

"He moved on to further his career and had to drop down to 2 levels below the conference to get work before climbing the men's ladder. Because the levels aren't comparable."

I would gues that a large part of the problem there could have been due to the fact that many involved in the men's game are stubborn or 'traditional' and are often reluctant (or in many cases, outright refuse) to acknowledge that the way things have always been might not be the way they should continue to be.

Two standout examples:
1. Corners. Despite the fact that corners only have a 2% success rate, everyone still thinks that lumping the ball into the box is the best tactic for a corner. People rarely attempt to try anything different. Even the teams that aren't renowned for being strong in the air.

2. If you haven't played at the highest level you can't be a top level manager (or, more frequently, if you're a top level player then you get a job as a top-level manager). This, quite frankly, is utter bollocks and the only real reason why this is a reality is because the players seemingly don't respect someone who hasn't been there and done it. Which, in my opinion, is utterly ridiculous. We see time and time and time again that top level, elite players end up as absolutely diabolical managers, and some of the best managers on the planet never played at a high level.

"Tactics that work great for England ladies cannot simply be transferred to a L2 club. I accept the principles of shape, space and patterns of play aren't that different, but the execution is."

Why? It's all relative. I mean, with the exception of exploiting particular weaknesses in the women's game (such as hitting high looping crosses, or shooting high into the net having a better chance of resulting in a goal) I don't really see what would be so completely different that it couldn't be transferable. Men tend to be technically better, stronger, faster and more physical and cynical... absolutely. But with the exception of the last two, all the other points are relative. It's not like you're talking about getting a women's team to be competitive with a men's team.

The opposition are technically better... than who? Than women? Why is that relevant? You're coaching players who have been deemed to be sufficiently competent (debatable, of course) at the level in which they are playing... so why does the fact that you're coaching technically superior players to those in the women's game make coaching different? It's not as though training sessions consist of coaching the actual technique required to kick a football. And even if Mark was doing that with the England Ladies, then he just wouldn't run those sessions with the men.

I strongly believe that the fundamentals of coaching would be exactly the same, and the only differences would be for the few specific nuances, such as men being more physical, cynical and the examples I mentioned above. Maybe I'm completely overlooking something really obvious, but the points you've made don't cover any reason why a successful coach from the women's game couldn't be a successful coach in the men's game, other than purely because the players are arseholes and refuse to listen to someone they don't respect because 'they are only a women's coach' - in which case we need to seriously be looking at the way footballers are coached from a young age.

Edited by AgentEves at 20:21:52 on 18th September 2019

reply to this article | return to the front page


Next article in this thread: Re: You reap what you sow by Bladders18/9 21:41Wed Sep 18 21:41:56 2019

Previous thread: Michael Timlin by WASP17/9 18:25Tue Sep 17 18:25:56 2019view thread