As the most effective method to assess the players abilities had been to observe how they deal with situations in a match, I noted problems encountered against a rival team who provided more of a challenge than many teams played recently, and possessed good all-round ability. It seemed that the team had, contrary to what had been asked of them, subconsciously adopted a style of play that meant they were trying to take the ball through the middle of the pitch, working directly towards goal. This resulted in negative consequences and set a poor tempo for the game to end in a draw. Because there were disruptions in the shape which the game took, in terms of possession loss through tackles, poor touch, and misplaced passes, there was evidence that frustrations were growing with many of the team. This in turn resulted in cases of fouls being committed, and performance levels falling. Dollard (1939) argued that aggression is an innate response to frustration, and such aggressive reactions should be expected. Should the players experience frustration of this type, it is a natural reaction to act in an aggressive manner. In contrast, Bandura’s social learning theory (1977) found that behaviour is learned by observing others. It is thought that if this theory was being applied, the children would adopt an attitude of a role model, or somebody who was seen to be rewarded despite their action. This could take the form of a professional footballer, a parent, or a peer. As a coach, I felt that the only measures I was able to monitor would be the trait being copied within the team, i.e. the players mimicking each others poor response to being frustrated. Therefore, a decision by the manager and I was made that consisted of any offending player acting with poor self control would be substituted. Acts such as swearing, making tackles deemed to be dangerous, or descent of any other were forbidden.
From the match, one attribute that was consistently at question with most players was the ability to run with the ball at their feet, then make an accurate pass to a team-mate. As the team ethic set by the manager and I was that of a short-passing game, this inability has rarely been tested during matches. However, upon further research, we found that under the pressure of an opponent, many of the squad showed poor technical ability when demonstrating this skill. This took the form of players having too many or too little touches, putting too much or little weight on the touch, and general poor awareness when an opponent was in tackling range.
It was explained to the players post-match what our expectations of them was in terms of the style of play that was to be followed. The ethic highlighted was to adopt a passing game, stretch the play to create space, use the full pitch (use the wingers), and to attack space. Because many individuals were not employing this theory, we explained that the other were unable to apply the system due to lack of support, ie. Those who played through the middle were excluding the threat that the winger posed when attacking space. During past training sessions, focus has been on ensuring the wingers were able to comfortably receive the ball, and attack the space ahead of them. This skill required the ability to run with the ball using tight control, speed, and reading of the situation. A critical point highlighted by management was that we may have focussed on the wide players and neglected to develop the others in the team. The consequence was that they showed a poor understanding when applying the skill into a game.
Taking into account the problems that had been identified in the game, the aim of the session was to work on the team’s dribbling skills, and ensuring they were able to work the ball to wide areas.
By implementing the method worked on during my Level 2 training, I begun the session by having the players work unopposed. This allowed them to become acquainted with the technique and gain the fundamental understanding required to progress to a skill. The whole squad reacted well to the drill and instructions from myself. The teaching points I highlighted were that in order to travel the 20 yards with the ball at pace, the most effective method was to take few touches of the ball, make contact with the laces of the boot, be able to use both feet, and to direct the ball where they were heading. These simple commands were met with relative success, measured by all players demonstrating that they possessed the ability in which to complete the task.
To develop to a skill I introduced a defender to oppose. Initially the opposing player was intended to act as a ‘put off’ which the player with the ball could take the ball past by altering elements of his technique, i.e. whether to take an extra touch to maintain control, or whether to drive the touch forward in order to bypass the defender.
This exercise concluded with mixed success as many players struggled to beat the opposing player, and therefore lost possession. Upon further investigation, most of the individuals who lost possession seemed to be concentrating on the ball, and neglected to take into account the changing environment around them. With guidance from the manager and I, it was established that success in executing this skill came from being aware of any threats around the ball. Cross & Lyle (2003) argued that developing an awareness of any situation is likely to be an important part of decision making.
The next stage in developing the skill was to progress to a 4 v 4 game. The condition of the game was that players were allowed a maximum of 5 touches between them, then encouraged to pass to wingers who occupied a sterile area on each wing. They were then required to carry the ball for 20 yards to then produce a pass that would result in a shot on goal. This condition gave the players a chance to each run with the ball, and also encouraged the team to adopt the style of switching play that is commended by the manager and I. The next step was to allow one of the defending team to enter the sterile area and oppose play. This gave a gradual introduction to the attacker to apply his skill into a game situation. As this resulted in relative success, the sterile area was taken away which allowed free play. However, the players were limited to only 5 passes between the team. Because of the pitch area, running with the ball was essential to cover the ground ahead.
I felt that once the players had accepted the fact that they needed to become aware of other players in the vicinity, they reacted well and utilized their knowledge to the extend whereby even if they were halted by the defender in gaining ground they were able to prevent a tackle. During the 4 v 4 game, it was explained that verbal communication in such tasks was mandatory in achieving success. Connelly & Rotella (1991) believe that expressing feelings, communicating clearly, being assertive, and listening well are psychological skills that must be practiced to be perfected. Because the player in possession is concentrating on retaining the ball, deliberating over passing/running options, and also on potential threats, it is difficult to be visually aware of an approaching player from behind. Therefore a simple command from a team-mate would assist his decision making. This information was processed well by the squad as the game became dynamic, and verbal input was high.
As a whole, I felt the skill acquisition of most players was becoming well developed. Much of the technical information explained had been taken in and demonstrated to show progression. However, as highlighted by Schmidt (1991) skill learning is defined by permanency. I will observe how the players react to applying the skill in a game. Should they find problems then I would revisit this area and attempt to find which element of the technique was unclear.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Pentice-Hall.

Connelly, D. & Rotella, R.J. (1991). The social psychology of assertive communication: Issues in teaching assertiveness skills to athletes. The sport psychologist, 5, 73-87.

Cross, N. & Lyle, J. (2003). The Coaching Process: Principles and Practice for Sport. Butterworth-Heinemann, Edinburgh.

Dollard, J. et al. (1939). Frustration and Aggression. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Schmidt, R.A., Motor Learning and Performance: From Principles to Practice. Human Kinetics.