Lucas Cavallini

[Complete Homer]

30 minutes ago, DannyFromToronto23 said:

 

and he says " They don't play with passion" 

"Be the change you want to see in the world", Lucas 

[jpg75]

Obinna, in theory it shouldn't be a problem, but it is exactly because of the problem you yourself mention. Coaches. Winning = good. Defence, dump it out/off the boards, kick it long/dump it in etc. equals winning. If it's good enough to work in Hockey it's good enough for youth Soccer.

[Unnamed Trialist]

8 hours ago, ThiKu said:

Pro-rel is not the way to go. The reason is because you get teams playing like I had to play against in a recent tournament. Team 1 - the coach didn't shut up. Constantly telling each and every player where to go, when to move, what to say (they beat us 6-2 but I truly believe my kids learned a lot more). Team 2 - played 3 defenders, and 3 forwards (this is a 7v7 u10 tourney). I didn't count a pass being completed by them until the second half. They literally bashed the ball back to front EVERY.SINGLE.ATTACK whether it was through their regaining possession in their defensive third in open play, or from a goal kick. The tournament rule was "no heading" so they purposefully bashed the ball to my defenders heads and tried to run beyond (and because I don't have robots my players figured out for themselves how to adequately deal with these long ball tactics - and I can say by the 2nd half my players were laughing at the opponent and didn't care we were losing because they knew the other team was playing garbage soccer - we ended up winning). 

Canada cannot have a pro-rel youth system because coaches will abuse it to try and get wins. They will ignore development, but likely claim they are totally focused on development to get ignorant parents to sign up. The parents are starting to learn as well, and that will quickly get old for them. The parents on my team for example talked often about the kids running in little groups and how discouraging it was for them, and were so glad to see the team in a 2 month period begin to utilize positioning, space, and trying to control/pass. They didn't care we lost more than we won. They only cared the players were starting to play "real soccer."

This post shows what is wrong with Canadian soccer, the thinking is so skewed, and we can convince ourselves we are right when 99% of the rest of the soccer world thinks otherwise. And people who call themselve soccer fans actually like this stuff. We are hopelessly lost.

I mean, " coaches will abuse it to try and get wins". Where do you come up with this stuff?. I have lived close to pro-leg all my kid´s career, and the teams that promote are usually the most technical and the best at playing the game. Some may be a bit more direct, but none has bad technique and only physicality. 

In any case, if you don't have pro-rel, clubs abuse the system and charge huge sums for poor coaching that can never be proven to be deficient because leagues are not competitive. You are basically saying that let's not let teams win, because that will deny the Canadian soccer mafias their scamming possibilities. You are arguing in favour of scamming, straight and simple, which is what private Canadian academies do.

As for the examples, well they make me laugh. You just take a dumb premise, no heading, then say it hurts defenders who can't clear properly. Of frigging course. But who came up with no heading, ever? And why didn't they also say NO HIGH BALLS? It is someone changing FIFA rules, thinking they are smarter (when they are just being soccer freaks), then arguing on the basis of their own freaky rules.

Why not make this the rule: in 7 a side, even if there is no heading for some  reason, all teams must make three or four passes in their end before hoofing it forwards. And in attacking end, all teams must make 2-3 passes before shooting. Then only shoot inside a certain point, in close. Which, by the way, is how many clubs train seven a side anyways, touches to get out, touches before shooting. I did when I coached, it was plain logical. We even trained every player has to get a touch before you can go for a goal. You bet they learnt.

But no, we behave like freaks, put on weird dark glasses and clown shoes, then say, hey, it doesn't work, you can't see and you can't run. That is the state of loser Canadian soccer.  And it is all designed to keep private clubs in the money conning parents and players who are paying with no guarantee of quality. I find it appalling that people defend it because it is far and away the least ethical option on the table.

Edited July 4, 2017 by Unnamed Trialist

[Unnamed Trialist]

1 hour ago, DannyFromToronto23 said:

cavallini interview before leaving for the national team

when the reporters ask him how the type of soccer Canadians play he says " it's Nothing Special " 

and he says " They don't play with passion" 

and says some other awful  stuff about the CANMNT basically trashing the team in front of Uruguayan media 

if you speak Spanish you will understand 

 

No se siente la misma pasión-They don't have the same passion

Si pierdes les da igual-If you lose they don't care

I would like to think this should not be the case. But when this same thread has people defending house league mentality and non-competitive football, and fans are liking those ideas, then you have to say he is 100% right. We do not have the same passion. And if we lose, we don't care. Just watch fans after an MLS or Fury or PDL game, or even the women though that is changin. We don't care if we lose, it does not matter to us.

I think that at least, when you have a real chance of winning, you have to fight for those results, and you have to be immensely disappointed to not meet reasonable goals. At least you felt after England took us out in the Women's, that we had underachieved, that we had missed at least one step, semis at home. But with the men, the expectation is just terrible. We absolutely have to be saying get out of the group stage in GC. And get into the HEX for WC. To do that, also, get our ranking up so we can be seeded better, since our GC group is hard because we are ranked low. 

Edited July 4, 2017 by Unnamed Trialist

[BrennanFan]

1 hour ago, DannyFromToronto23 said:

when the reporters ask him how the type of soccer Canadians play he says " it's Nothing Special " 

and he says " They don't play with passion" 

and says some other awful  stuff about the CANMNT basically trashing the team in front of Uruguayan media 

if you speak Spanish you will understand 

 

As indicated above, not 100% accurate translation but in any event, his comments arent the typical comments we are used to hearing from players and guess what, sometimes the truth hurts.  Lucas as a relative outsider speaking to foreign media publicly states what we on this forum have known for years: the CMNT has problems with their collective mentality.

Refusing call ups, bitching at coaches in the media after eliminations, stupid cards and suspensions, hitting the clubs after games, missing clear scoring opportunities, being one player with your club and a totally different player with Canada... and this is just stuff we know about, God knows what kinds of things are said and done behind closed doors.  

Ive been critical of Cavallini before but at the end of the day here he is answering the call for us early in this new cycle, while missing competitive games with his club and time with his family, just to try to contribute to Canadian soccer.  I hope he does well and becomes a leader on this team, and helps change the mentality of the group.       

[ThiKu]

1 hour ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

This post shows what is wrong with Canadian soccer, the thinking is so skewed, and we can convince ourselves we are right when 99% of the rest of the soccer world thinks otherwise. And people who call themselve soccer fans actually like this stuff. We are hopelessly lost.

I mean, " coaches will abuse it to try and get wins". Where do you come up with this stuff?. I have lived close to pro-leg all my kid´s career, and the teams that promote are usually the most technical and the best at playing the game. Some may be a bit more direct, but none has bad technique and only physicality. 

In any case, if you don't have pro-rel, clubs abuse the system and charge huge sums for poor coaching that can never be proven to be deficient because leagues are not competitive. You are basically saying that let's not let teams win, because that will deny the Canadian soccer mafias their scamming possibilities. You are arguing in favour of scamming, straight and simple, which is what private Canadian academies do.

As for the examples, well they make me laugh. You just take a dumb premise, no heading, then say it hurts defenders who can't clear properly. Of frigging course. But who came up with no heading, ever? And why didn't they also say NO HIGH BALLS? It is someone changing FIFA rules, thinking they are smarter (when they are just being soccer freaks), then arguing on the basis of their own freaky rules.

Why not make this the rule: in 7 a side, even if there is no heading for some  reason, all teams must make three or four passes in their end before hoofing it forwards. And in attacking end, all teams must make 2-3 passes before shooting. Then only shoot inside a certain point, in close. Which, by the way, is how many clubs train seven a side anyways, touches to get out, touches before shooting. I did when I coached, it was plain logical. We even trained every player has to get a touch before you can go for a goal. You bet they learnt.

But no, we behave like freaks, put on weird dark glasses and clown shoes, then say, hey, it doesn't work, you can't see and you can't run. That is the state of loser Canadian soccer.  And it is all designed to keep private clubs in the money conning parents and players who are paying with no guarantee of quality. I find it appalling that people defend it because it is far and away the least ethical option on the table.

In Spain it works. We are not Spain. We are not any other country. Come here and coach a u11-12 team. You will see what I mean. You can't tell me that a u10 team play 3 defenders, 3 forwards trying to win a semi-final by not completing a single pass until the 2nd half is in the players best interests. Coaches and parents screaming "don't pass up the middle!" is not in anyone's best development interests.

Canada does not know better. Canada is an infant in this sport. We're in the wilderness on top of that. We're babies raised by wolves. Do not think because Spain etc do it one way, we can do it properly here. We have volunteer dads who have never kicked a soccer ball coaching our "development" teams....

[ThiKu]

1 hour ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

This post shows what is wrong with Canadian soccer, the thinking is so skewed, and we can convince ourselves we are right when 99% of the rest of the soccer world thinks otherwise. And people who call themselve soccer fans actually like this stuff. We are hopelessly lost.

I mean, " coaches will abuse it to try and get wins". Where do you come up with this stuff?. I have lived close to pro-leg all my kid´s career, and the teams that promote are usually the most technical and the best at playing the game. Some may be a bit more direct, but none has bad technique and only physicality. 

In any case, if you don't have pro-rel, clubs abuse the system and charge huge sums for poor coaching that can never be proven to be deficient because leagues are not competitive. You are basically saying that let's not let teams win, because that will deny the Canadian soccer mafias their scamming possibilities. You are arguing in favour of scamming, straight and simple, which is what private Canadian academies do.

As for the examples, well they make me laugh. You just take a dumb premise, no heading, then say it hurts defenders who can't clear properly. Of frigging course. But who came up with no heading, ever? And why didn't they also say NO HIGH BALLS? It is someone changing FIFA rules, thinking they are smarter (when they are just being soccer freaks), then arguing on the basis of their own freaky rules.

Why not make this the rule: in 7 a side, even if there is no heading for some  reason, all teams must make three or four passes in their end before hoofing it forwards. And in attacking end, all teams must make 2-3 passes before shooting. Then only shoot inside a certain point, in close. Which, by the way, is how many clubs train seven a side anyways, touches to get out, touches before shooting. I did when I coached, it was plain logical. We even trained every player has to get a touch before you can go for a goal. You bet they learnt.

But no, we behave like freaks, put on weird dark glasses and clown shoes, then say, hey, it doesn't work, you can't see and you can't run. That is the state of loser Canadian soccer.  And it is all designed to keep private clubs in the money conning parents and players who are paying with no guarantee of quality. I find it appalling that people defend it because it is far and away the least ethical option on the table.

We cross paths on twitter - you and I agree on almost everything. In this we can't agree. 

Are you of the impression I am saying "no heading"? It was a tournament rule. It's one I completely disagree with (as did my players by the way). Settle down, and think before you post. 

ps-my players were able to clear the ball effectively, thus our opponent became completely unable to participate in the game - we ran over them after going down 2-0 early and figuring out how to deal with them (and guess what - it took no intervention fro me for my players to sort it out other than me asking one defender to drop off in case the first defender missed the ball).

[ThiKu]

1 hour ago, dsqpr said:

The "no heading" rule for youngsters is presumably based on the connection between alzheimers disease and retired footballers.

The rule I remember from indoor was "no balls above shoulder height". If you kick the ball above shoulder height it is a free kick to the other team. This would simultaneously adress the "no heading" rule and would also invalidate the ridiculous tactics described earlier.

"no balls above shoulder height" would be a reasonable rule if you are trying to develop skill rather than "kick it to the fast kid" I agree.

[Obinna]

1 hour ago, jpg75 said:

Obinna, in theory it shouldn't be a problem, but it is exactly because of the problem you yourself mention. Coaches. Winning = good. Defence, dump it out/off the boards, kick it long/dump it in etc. equals winning. If it's good enough to work in Hockey it's good enough for youth Soccer.

Yes coaching is the problem, but the answer is not to then ban keeping score / standings / pro-rel etc. 

That is disincentivizing winning. 

In what universe will we get more competitive by taking competition out of soccer? 

From what I have seen in Calgary, it is the ethnic youth teams who employ what we'd call "the proper way" of playing. They beat the "Hockey style" teams all the time, handily in fact.

The provinces should implement a top down restriction on who can or cannot coach, even in recreational soccer. 

That will work much better than this "no keeping score" nonsense. It is seriously the most regressive strategy imaginable. It is a prime example of why we are a joke in World Soccer.

[Obinna]

17 minutes ago, ThiKu said:

In Spain it works. We are not Spain. We are not any other country. Come here and coach a u11-12 team. You will see what I mean. You can't tell me that a u10 team play 3 defenders, 3 forwards trying to win a semi-final by not completing a single pass until the 2nd half is in the players best interests. Coaches and parents screaming "don't pass up the middle!" is not in anyone's best development interests.

Canada does not know better. Canada is an infant in this sport. We're in the wilderness on top of that. We're babies raised by wolves. Do not think because Spain etc do it one way, we can do it properly here. We have volunteer dads who have never kicked a soccer ball coaching our "development" teams....

When I played recreationally at the U-10 level, I remember my team won most of our games. My dad (Nigerian) was the coach. He actually taught the kids on the team how to play. Organized practices. He also gave the better players more time than the scrubs. Parents were furious but he did not care. I don't even think he understood why they were so upset to be honest.

We won a lot and played as well as you can expect from am U-10 house league team.

If a team is playing kick and run, not completing a single pass, and your team cannot handle that, I am afraid that is on you as a coach. 

For all the volunteer dad coaches who have never kicked a ball, let their teams lose and get humiliated. They will never learn if they don't suffer defeat.

It is not complicated at this level. They will learn by adapting to what works. If you take away winning, the lessons of "what works" are lost.

Edited July 5, 2017 by Obinna

[Obinna]

1 hour ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

 

In any case, if you don't have pro-rel, clubs abuse the system and charge huge sums for poor coaching that can never be proven to be deficient because leagues are not competitive. You are basically saying that let's not let teams win, because that will deny the Canadian soccer mafias their scamming possibilities. You are arguing in favour of scamming, straight and simple, which is what private Canadian academies do.

 

I couldn't have said it better myself. Absolutely spot on.

Competition is key.

[Obinna]

33 minutes ago, ThiKu said:

We cross paths on twitter - you and I agree on almost everything. In this we can't agree. 

Are you of the impression I am saying "no heading"? It was a tournament rule. It's one I completely disagree with (as did my players by the way). Settle down, and think before you post. 

ps-my players were able to clear the ball effectively, thus our opponent became completely unable to participate in the game - we ran over them after going down 2-0 early and figuring out how to deal with them (and guess what - it took no intervention fro me for my players to sort it out other than me asking one defender to drop off in case the first defender missed the ball).

So, if your team was able to adjust and win in the end, why you are even using this example to begin with?

[Unnamed Trialist]

1 hour ago, dsqpr said:

The "no heading" rule for youngsters is presumably based on the connection between alzheimers disease and retired footballers.

The rule I remember from indoor was "no balls above shoulder height". If you kick the ball above shoulder height it is a free kick to the other team. This would simultaneously adress the "no heading" rule and would also invalidate the ridiculous tactics described earlier.

I am aware that heading has some problems, and that kids can be hurt heading. Also because there are nuts out there who don't know how to inflate a ball, making it worse.

Thing is, in some situations it should be allowed. Like off a rebound or a chip, just for a control. Still, if you watch pro futsal, heading is minimal, for occasional goals and for the odd control. Saving a goal off the line. But there are so many ways to compensate this (starting, for example, with properly accrediting youth coaches, how about it?)

[Unnamed Trialist]

52 minutes ago, Obinna said:

Yes coaching is the problem, but the answer is not to then ban keeping score / standings / pro-rel etc. 

That is disincentivizing winning. 

In what universe will we get more competitive by taking competition out of soccer? 

From what I have seen in Calgary, it is the ethnic youth teams who employ what we'd call "the proper way" of playing. They beat the "Hockey style" teams all the time, handily in fact.

The provinces should implement a top down restriction on who can or cannot coach, even in recreational soccer. 

That will work much better than this "no keeping score" nonsense. It is seriously the most regressive strategy imaginable. It is a prime example of why we are a joke in World Soccer.

We used to allow non-certified coaching in Spain, up to about 6-8 years ago, for under certain ages, and under certain play levels. Then, they implemented a simple course, like for a camp counsellor level, which still had some basic nous in there. Like doing the written part of a driving test. 

Even with that, if a coach cannot properly kick and control, you are screwed. The club should train the coach in basic skills for young ages, and show them a few drills (always with the ball if possible, a ball per kid even). 

I am always stopping on the street watching kids in Barcelona, and showing them how to use their instep. Like those from certain immigrant families (Pakistanis, Filipinos) who want to play, but have not learnt how. Often before school age, since in a school yard they'll pick up basics too. Stop for 2 minutes and show a kid how to place the support foot, how the passiing foot turns out. And then, the control the same way.

If it were up to me we'd set up a foundation and offer free clinics in working class neighbourhoods, in city parks, to give soccer to those who can't pay the academy scam fees.

[ThiKu]

33 minutes ago, Obinna said:

So, if your team was able to adjust and win in the end, why you are even using this example to begin with?

Give this one a really good think and I am sure you will grasp it - because I am considering the greater good. What were the opposition learning? How many teams are playing like this? How many missed development opportunities are happening b/c coaches are coaching to win a meaningless u10 tourney rather than coaching to develop players?

[ThiKu]

7 minutes ago, Unnamed Trialist said:

We used to allow non-certified coaching in Spain, up to about 6-8 years ago, for under certain ages, and under certain play levels. Then, they implemented a simple course, like for a camp counsellor level, which still had some basic nous in there. Like doing the written part of a driving test. 

Even with that, if a coach cannot properly kick and control, you are screwed. The club should train the coach in basic skills for young ages, and show them a few drills (always with the ball if possible, a ball per kid even). 

I am always stopping on the street watching kids in Barcelona, and showing them how to use their instep. Like those from certain immigrant families (Pakistanis, Filipinos) who want to play, but have not learnt how. Often before school age, since in a school yard they'll pick up basics too. Stop for 2 minutes and show a kid how to place the support foot, how the passiing foot turns out. And then, the control the same way.

If it were up to me we'd set up a foundation and offer free clinics in working class neighbourhoods, in city parks, to give soccer to those who can't pay the academy scam fees.

and here is exactly where you and I are on the same page.

[Unnamed Trialist]

1 hour ago, ThiKu said:

In Spain it works. We are not Spain. We are not any other country. Come here and coach a u11-12 team. You will see what I mean. You can't tell me that a u10 team play 3 defenders, 3 forwards trying to win a semi-final by not completing a single pass until the 2nd half is in the players best interests. Coaches and parents screaming "don't pass up the middle!" is not in anyone's best development interests.

Canada does not know better. Canada is an infant in this sport. We're in the wilderness on top of that. We're babies raised by wolves. Do not think because Spain etc do it one way, we can do it properly here. We have volunteer dads who have never kicked a soccer ball coaching our "development" teams....

Not just Spain, ThiKu. Vietnam too. And Bahrein, and Mali. And Iceland if you hadn't noticed last Eurocup. And in NCAA women. And in Venezuela. And even Fiji.

If you compete properly, the team that plays the best football will win most of the time, over the mid to long term. This is a simple fact. My experience also tells me that the higher level clubs will play better soccer at the youth level, they will demand it. When my kid has played against a pro club academy, apart from them being nasty trying to win, they are always, without exception, a talented bunch with rigorous coaching. 

If there is a huge physical difference, that is bad luck, but hey, that will alter every single sport, your pygmies are not going to beat you at basketball. Unless, of course, they clog up the key in defense and all learn to shoot beautiful threes from well behind the line, there is always a way. Did anyone see Japan beat S Africa in the last rugby WC? Beautiful.

[gator]

I don't care what he said or how it translates, I just want him to play well and score goals for us, all will be good then! If he was as harsh as some say his comments were that will put more pressure on himself to play well and that might not be a bad thing!

[Obinna]

29 minutes ago, ThiKu said:

Give this one a really good think and I am sure you will grasp it - because I am considering the greater good. What were the opposition learning? How many teams are playing like this? How many missed development opportunities are happening b/c coaches are coaching to win a meaningless u10 tourney rather than coaching to develop players?

Coaching to win is part of player development, but I do know what you mean. You mean that some coaches sacrifice "beautiful soccer" in order to win games. What I am saying is that if you train players to play the right way, the problem takes care of itself. I am also saying that if you cannot train players to beat the sort of teams/coaches you are referring to, you are not doing a good job. In any case, removing winning or goals or score keeping is definitely not the answer.

[BearcatSA]

4 hours ago, dsqpr said:

Maybe this will be exactly the kick up the arse our team needs. If the rest of the team thinks Cavellini is wrong, they can go out there and prove it!

Or if they lose their first match,  invite him out to an evening at the local night clubs!

Edited July 5, 2017 by BearcatSA

[hamiltonfan]

25 minutes ago, BearcatSA said:

Or if they lose their first match,  invite him out to evening at the local night clubs!

Lol 

[Unnamed Trialist]

1 hour ago, BearcatSA said:

Or if they lose their first match,  invite him out to an evening at the local night clubs!

I'm with you. If Lucas does not perform, I will not sit around defending him because he said something I agreed with trying to suck up to the Uruguayan press. 

[BearcatSA]

I hope Cavalini does well for us.  When I last saw him in a full match it was at the Olympic qualifiers over five years ago and I thought he showed a lot of good stuff back then.  Hopefully, he can do it again at this GC.

 

Interesting to note that I think that the only other members from that squad in this current GC team are Piette, who was quite young at the time, and Teibert.  Perhaps Henry would be in this team were it not for injury problems.  As what has happened with other previous NT youth squads, a few of the higher touted guys haven't had their careers pan out for a variety of reasons.  

[nolando]

5 minutes ago, BearcatSA said:

I hope Cavalini does well for us.  When I last saw him in a full match it was at the Olympic qualifiers over five years ago and I thought he showed a lot of good stuff back then.  Hopefully, he can do it again at this GC.

 

Interesting to note that I think that the only other members from that squad in this current GC team are Piette, who was quite young at the time, and Teibert.  Perhaps Henry would be in this team were it not for injury problems.  As what has happened with other previous NT youth squads, a few of the higher touted guys haven't had their careers pan out for a variety of reasons.  

 

[BenFisk'sBiggestFan]

7 hours ago, Obinna said:

This is exactly what I was alluding to. 

I understand that kick and run works in youth soccer, but I believe that it wouldn't if teams were coached better to deal with it. 

I say this from my experience playing recreational youth soccer, competitive youth soccer, coaching high school soccer and running clinics and camps for players from the ages of 14 all the way down to 5. 

In my opinion, U10 is when kids are coordinated enough and mentally focused enough where you can actually teach them how to play the game (and get results while doing it).

Before then, let them run around like flies and win and lose. Don't take the fun out of it by not keeping score. It is ridiculous.

Most 6 and 7 year olds are not concerned with developing skills and learning "how to play" anyways. They just want to kick the ball in the net. Let them have fun.

Just on the topic of kick and run soccer...

I played tier 4 soccer in a small town of 5000. When i was young we played kick and run and every town did. When I got to U12 my coach introduced us to a proper possession and passing game. At first we sucked, our first year we were terrible. But by U14 onwards we won our division year after year because we learned how to pass and defend properly. Not a single player on our team was super athletic and we played some very athletic teams. Possession and passing will always beat the athletic teams even at the low levels. 

Another experience of mine is helping coach u10 soccer. Our season is only 2 months long. My team was again the least athletic and really didn't have the greatest drive. They lost every game almost all year. But we got them to practice passing, dribbling and, positioning. Their end tourney against the same teams they tied 3 of the teams and lost by 1 goal against the other. Coaching possession and positioning even works at low levels. But you have to make it FUN not boring. 

I guess my point is it is really important to teach the fundamentals of soccer at a low level. If kids are taught possession, passing, and basic positioning at a low level they will develop the skills. It deffinately works, the problem is getting coaches to do it.