Model for Success in the AFL. Does one exist?
I listened with interest to a SEN radio interview that said Geelong now had the model for success. Does a model exist? The AFL is a very small, totally controlled and in fact non-elite “youth biased” competition. Salary caps, drafts etc. Players drafted well before they are even close to full maturity. The funnel starts at 16 then 18 then pours kids in.
I presented at an AFL conference on the optimal age for success in sport and as we know (or should) it is very predictable. Things happen around 25. I found that AFL champion teams had an average age of approx 25.7 and 70/75% of players were between 22 and 28 in general. There were more young players than old and if a player was < 22 they had to play approx 50 games. Most players need to be around 25/26 and maybe 27. A BELL curve slightly weighted on the youth side. When this hit me on paper, I understood my years in AFL. Even the 93 Bombers teams I was with was a lot more mature than people realized. Hills had been there 5 years and the other 4kids 2 to 3. The rest were hard nuts.
So when clubs self destruct and keep throwing players out and going young they simply will have to wait 5 years as a minimum. Forget amazing sports scientists and gurus. That is the problem. A good accountant and CEO are more important to a club given the impact finance and stability has on a club.
Geelong had the bulk of its player by 2002. By 2005 they had played 5 finals with the odd old player leaving. Sanderson and Graham for example. They simply were out thought in 2005 (and only played one Rickman, a massive mistake) and also that year most of the young crew was not ready. Some were still “sowing wild oats” and for some it had not sunk in yet what was required at the elite level. Guess what? That is normal and if a club tries to beat that good luck! Might happen but rare.
So when Leigh Matthews knew the era was over they simply went young in general. A young team went closish in 2008 to finals but fell apart and then improved a squeak in 2009. Getting to 25 average! Thus 2005/2006/2007/2008 was development. Normal!
Voss has simply tried to get mature players to top this now mature squad up to get ahead & win quickly. This is a slight variation on a model. Just has to make sure they are the right players
So if a club poaches coaches and staff from the current Grand Final team then will that work? Probably not! Rarely does.
Clubs simply forget that Luke Hodge needed as many pre seasons and games as did Bartel to get to the stage where he could help the HAWKS win flag.100 odd games and 5 to 6 pre seasons. Simple.
So these AMAZING people will go to a club and have to deal with 18 to 22 year olds with average talent in general and wait years. That’s it. In the end there is not that much talent in Australia in any sport so development and maturity is the key. The superstars start early and late. Then often they get edgy and at 22 good development is thrown out in a bad year and dumb comments like culture are made. What does culture mean? Weird comment.
So does a model exist? Yes and it doesn’t guarantee success but guarantees relative success. Collingwood missed its last opportunity in 2007 when older players nearly snagged a win versus Geelong. The model is simply make sure the club is financial given people are happy when they are paid and everything is available. Make sure a group has been together for a number of years and has developed their skills and bodies and also developed a combative nature to their game.
Steven King was captain of an immature young group. Tough gig and that was after years of carrying the ruck duties at Geelong.
Geelong was smart. They kept the playing group together. They stabilized a dodgy political situation. They had played 5 finals. Done 6/8 pre seasons together. Teams will be able to do it quicker than Geelong given players come into the system better prepared now than Corey/Ablett/Mackie etc. But there you go. That’s the model. Get your group to an average of 25. Tweak it as long as you can so it stays like that. Probably a window of 5 years. Have heaps of dough and resources and be slightly better.
The AFL is so predictable now. We are going to have so many teams of the century in the next 20 years. The reality is that the talent pool is very thin. So many clubs simply keep starting again and then get edgy on the way.
Basketball and Volleyball. Why such poor marketing appeal in Australia?
With absolutely no disrespect to Netball ( but some disrespect to Slamball and watching racing cars doing weird long curves on ONE HD ) one wonders why Basketball and Volleyball cannot draw the marketing required to launch the sports in OZ. Are there dark forces keeping these sports at such a low visibility or is someone doing something wrong?
It is weird!
These two are massive sports worldwide and will remain so. Professional leagues abound worldwide. Netball is a great sport and fantastic viewing, but simply played in the old Commonwealth.
The presentation of Netball has been superb and has been underpinned by the new channel. Also I realize there are a huge number of players in OZ which translates to a viewing audience. All makes sense eh!
I have had some involvement in Volleyball recently and it should have more presence. The dollar rules and marketing requires numbers. It is frustrating to walk down the road and see complete hacks getting good money in local footy when classy kids pay to play Volleyball, let alone get on the big screen. They way we structure our sports clubs is weird. There are heaps of stadiums all over the place but no big concentrated clubs like in Europe which house many sports under the one sponsor and generate funding and necessary exposure. Would work!
As an old Track and Field athlete I can understand a little the amatuer background that permeates the sport but Volleyball and Basketball are big sports around the globe with massive participation rates.
It is such a pity ( but understandable) that industry simply pumps money into sports that are marketable at present given 70,000 plus people went to watch Collingwood vs Essendon but I am sure a long term approach by sponsors to get behind these sports and then push them onto the stage would yield results in the long term given the global nature of the sports. In the end our soccer, basketabll and volleyball players are far better known worldwide than out “native” sports and that won’t chamge in our lifetime. How can that be translated to sponsors?
A little bit of insight is required. Newspapers are losing ground. Why. Because of the internet. We have seen many Asian soccer teams play in OZ recently. The world is getting smaller.Refugees are flooding in! Now I being stupid.
In the long term “global” sports will encroach. Once the pathways open up for kids to play soccer and earn money. Boom. Heaps of kids will play soccer. AFL is the best earner for young fellas so they play it. Equation is simple!
Right now good players are drifitng away from Volleyball to Netball on the women’s side. Yet a quality Volleyballer can play in any country in the world? But you are almost on your own as a Volleyballer here. And basketball is not far off as we speak.
So get rid of friggin SLAMBALL and put OZ Volleyballers and Basketballers on the screen! Geez!
Come on you guys. Wrest the initiative from the AFL and get kids to play Volleyball in Western Sydney. Paul Roos would be rapt! Before someone gives Lote another million to play Rugby League and Demetriou starts brainwashing newly born babies in Western Sydney get in there! I hear that every new baby born in Western Sydney will be given a Sherrin.
The men’s Volleyball team won the Asian Championship last year and is a great team. There are some awesome and spectacular athletes playing.
Someone has to realize that the one constant in life is change and there are some sports that simply are global and some that are not. Take the punt.
Get rid of slamball and put Volleyball on the screen and sponsor it. Go on. Do it!
And more so one needs to see the development of multi faceted sports centres and clubs. If a big sponsor took over a facility and simply from there ran 3 or 4 National clubs instead of clubs trying to market themsleves I am sure that sponsor would get results from investments.
The models exist overseas especially in Europe. Let’s get some lateral thinking going!
i hear Slamball is going to try and wrest the initiative from the AFL in Western Sydney. Every new born kid in Western Sydney wil get one of those little tramps that kids get! Watch out Andy!
Apology from Geelong Advertiser to Loris Bertolacci
Apology to Loris Bertolacci
June 23rd, 2009
TODAY the Geelong Advertiser extends a formal apology to Loris Bertolacci for three articles published on March 23 and 31 and June 6, 2007.
The articles published in the newspaper and on our website attacked Mr Bertolacci’s fitness coaching competence. The Geelong Advertiser unreservedly withdraws those imputations and also acknowledges that Mr Bertolacci has acted with utmost integrity in his dealings with us.
The Geelong Advertiser accepts the articles damaged Mr Bertolacci’s reputation and regrets that.
The Geelong Advertiser apologises for the hurt and embarrassment to Mr Bertolacci, his family and friends.
Specificity of Resistance Belts or Bungee Cords for tennis?
Recently I bought a bungee cord/resistance belt whatever you want to call it. Then browsing through some websites and articles I added a few “specific” exercises to the routines of some tennis players. Gee wihiz looks like you know what you are doing when the belt comes out. But how relevant?
On an ITF site there is a video of some player running out under resistance with a racquet then doing a split step and then lunging into a shot. This to me is about as relevant as jumping off a massive bungee cord and maybe that is more relevant given it is so scary and thus trains the fight or flight response as against a slow resistance exercise.
When one explodes into a shot a player might take 2 or 3 100% steps, then decelerate and then get into position for a shot. So why do this under resistance when all the motor patterns will be different. Have to be. Probably a little bit of core work involved and maybe some dynamic balance! But I am sure one can do better work in formal core and balance work anyway.
Yes we do outsmart ourselves in Strength and Conditioning these days and sometimes it is done so as to look good. As I said it looks pretty professional but how specific?
In the end it is probably just better to lunge, and side lunge and get low. That is critical. Maybe catching medicine balls at 100% pace is good exercise but again a very different exercise relative to running into a shot or trying to “dig” a ball out in Volleyball.
Hey I am just thinking out aloud so invite comments.
“Chaos” training in Soccer and small sided games. Developmental needs of young athletes.
There is a lot of confusion now in the fitness industry on how to manage kids. We now have this explosion of advice telling our young players to play games, games and more games. This mantra has evolved from Skill Acquisition dogma where random variable skills learning was seen to be more efficient than massed practice. So play games and create “chaos” and easy “peasy”. We are now told of all these amazing benefits from endurance to decision making. Then we have the research on reactive agility which is very ‘sexy” and again has underpinned advice that games, games and more games is the way to go. There is an up side to this of course because it may stop over zealous youth coaches from running kids into the ground instead of focussing on the game.
I will target this article on young athletes close to puberty and/or at or past puberty. Young kids do need to play a lot but even there they would have maximum variety in their development. Another story. But I have recently dealt with one 7 year old who simply was not enjoying sport. By working one on one with him and doing simple fitness. Co ordination and general strength and fitness activities he has improved so much that he now wants to participate and is quite good. Also another 10 year old last year had terrible balance and little co ordination or confidence and again after a year of work with basic activities he has started to improve to the point where he can cut it with other kids. If he had simply played more and more games he would have been left behind and simply given up. In theory it all sounds easy but sports scientists out there, it aint that simple.
The more games young tennis kids in OZ have played the worse out tennis has gone. We have a massive coaching structure in tennis of private coaches and yet very few kids can sprint, jump, change direction and co ordinate their feet. And then all of a sudden at 15 or 16 they have to get this together even though they can hit.
Soccer is going down the funnel way. Get heaps of kids doing soccer and playing small games and then pick and choose on his way through. Guess what. Sure the skilled kids will come through but the quicker, fitter more nimble ones will rise to the top (if they can play). Sounds good to me. Bit like the simplistic TAC AFL system. Choose kids at 15 and really that’s it. They get coached and the rest go back to “dumbsville”. That creates a pool of kids to push into the AFL system.
In soccer super leagues are evolving at under 13 and under 14 and pretty much starting the funnel. I am involved in heaps of these systems. If a player is not good enough then he or she doesn’t come though the system. And that “good enough” is relevant to how they play. And fitter, faster kids will always bubble through (who can play). So if we do very little specific running and change of direction work (added to S&C) with kids simply genetics will be the factor.
It is such a lazy theory and in fact someone recently said you can only get a 3% improvement with players in speed so why work on it. Are we starting to go crazy! That 3% is the difference between under 20 top sprinters and worlds’ best. So this percentage has been used to validate only playing small games with kids. I have seen young athletes dramatically improve speed at all ages. Due to strength, power, range, technique, feel. Whatever.
Sure we will have players come though and the “men in suits” will be happy. And we all know chaos training and random variable training is important. But just as players who cannot kick are at a distinct disadvantage in AFL so are kids who cannot run. And one has to train the basics also.
I am sure that if an under 14 soccer player who is on the fringe of a representative side goes off and does quality strength and conditioning and speed and power work and then goes back to trial he or she will go lots closer to selection. And what I am talking about is always improving the individual. Not a funnel system
Guess what. In tennis the realization has come about that OZ players can’t move, Cant sprint. Can’t change direction. Maybe some cannot anticipate. And so on. But neglect the basics of footwork and the needs of movements and good luck.
So let’s take a deep breath. On average the top 100 tennis players are quicker than the 400 to 500. Serie A players are quicker than Serie C players. AFL players accelerate more than local players.
And can you make a slow person beat Usain Bolt. Of course not. But you can make that person a lot faster and a lot sharper with movement.
On the other hand one good take home form all this emphasis on games is that it will stop “crazy” coaches running kids into the ground with fitness and endurance activities and spend more time learning and puffing.
All a bit confusing but we need to teach kids so many skills and provide them with as broad an arsenal of movements and training to equip them for the future and maximize their individual development.
Is the media accountable in the AFL?
I listened with interest to SEN radio on Sunday May 31. The discussion started on the Ben Cousin’s affair, but ended up a debate on how accountable the media is now with reporting of the facts. This of course on the back of the Terry Wallace affair and other recent stories.
One major problem that exists now is that media needs stories and there are heaps of AFL media people and really not much with substance to write about. Hey we all have to eat, so I understand the desperation for stories.
But from my perspective I have been privy to many articles that in my opinion were not factual about my circumstances, especially after I settled my termination case with Geeling in good faith with Brian Cook and was satisfied with the outcome. Also I wanted to enjoy watching the exploits of players I had worked with for 7 years and was involved with in 5 finals in 2004 & 2005. Once I had settled I simply had moved on, but these articles written in the media and launched onto the worldwide net were dissapointing and I am in the process of doing something about it .
How does one keep the media accountable?
The problem with litigation is of course the cost and time until resolved. Media outlets are well organized to battle these challenges and simply try and squeeze the common person with time and obvious resources. That is fair enough given they are a business. Legal costs can be astronomical. An individual versus a mega business is always tough. It is stressful and really as worthwhile as it is not worthwhile. Damned if you do and damned if you don’t but gut feel it is the only way to ram the message home.
If one goes and bleats in the media then one can simply get shot down. The “WINNERS ARE GRINNERS” philospohy means people will nearly always side with power and success and not the facts. Success must equal good! If a club is financial and well resourced and has good players and coaches then success seems to follow. Culture? Weird term!
It is so easy to say something now on a website or on the media but so many people are very lazy and do very little research and care not for the havoc they can cause with their slack work. Funny thing is I think that if people get off their backsides and do proper research they can get the facts right.
Once these stories became “fish and chip paper” but now often they appear on the internet for the world to read. That has changed the landscape even more and requires even more accountability.
Opinions are ok and anyone can have any opinion but the facts are different.
But of course the public simply often use sport as a carthasis for normal life, so these “subjective” articles are great to read over a quick coffee. That’s the reality.
New Richmond Coach? AFL Coaches. Young? Old? Average Age?
How silly is the debate about AFL coaches and age right now.
AFL is such an insular sport and simply there are only 16 jobs available right now. Even in Gridiron there are more jobs and then good jobs at Universities in the US. Soccer and Rugby Union are worldwide so there is a huge pool. And in all sports simply the best coach gets the job with individual athletes and/or teams.
I saw the development of full time AFL. And in 2006/2007 I assisted the Western Bulldogs with a consultancy on their ACL injury plight and speed and power programs. I pointed them in the direction of where the game was going, repeat speed and repeat power and specificity. I provided an insight into how far behind the club had been in overall development from physical preparation to staff needs and so on. Not so much that their coaching or fitness had been poor, but how poorly resourced they had been given they had done an amazing job with little.
All of the current crop of young AFL coaches played AFL footy full time. They experienced this 9 to 5 job. I had been involved in track and field here and overseas so was privy to sports science and full time training. But when I went to Essendon in 1988 I got the shock of my life when players were turning up in overalls at 5.30. This continued till 1993 when Essendon dabbled in F/T footy. And even in the UK soccer had fallen behind Europe in the 90’s given the ‘OLD” coaches were clinging to the old days. But hey Hiddink is old and he knows what is needed in elite sport? Confused! Think about the wealth of jobs and the width and breadth of the soccer industry and so one is simply a coach.
But till 2000 many of the “old” coaches still wanted to train at 4.30 and Mark Thompson used Denis Pagan’s timetable in 2000 despite the reality we should train full time and that AFL was a 9 to 5 job now. But Kangas won a flag so 4.30 must be the right time eh?
So many of the “old” coaches from the VFL had to be dragged kicking and shouting into modern AFL or more correctly, Elite Sport.
I organized an expedition to the AIS in 1997 at Essendon and it took a lot of push to get people to go and Peter Jackson really had to make it happen. We listened to all the AIS people for a week and then went back and re-organized the processes at Essendon. Essendon led the charge then.
The one constant in life is change! So it is not about being 37 or 48 or 58 but whether one realizes that things always change and evolve. My opinion was that many formt he old VFL struggled to grab the concept that AFL was full time and elite and not like the good old days. But soon the old VFL people will simply be a thing of the past.
So what has happened is that some coaches have evolved well with full time AFL maybe such as Malthouse given they have grown with it. I am not privy to Collingwood, so have zero idea of how far he has evolved, or does he now and then hanker for the good old days? Others I think, tried to hang on to the old way of coaching and didn’t embrace the business nature of day to day operations. In the now famous Brian Cook review even Mark Thompson was viewed as having too much on his plate. I was gone in April 2006 so only read the review. HA!
But in time many 37 year olds will be 49 in the AFL and will have amazing sports science experience and elite coaching expertise. So in 2019 do we simply recruit 35 year old coaches because it is AFL and that is what you do. Duuuhhhh…In then end Voss has walked into a fully organized mega structure and also many of the players of the ‘ADCOCK” & RISCHITELLI age have had quite a few pre seasons. So maybe he has walked in when a core of players have started to mature mixed in with some good old players. If he had gotten the job 3 years ago with heaps of 1st year players how would he be viewed now? Clarkson just snuck in with finals. Just in time! Thompson was in finals in 2000 and then a Prelim and Semi in 04/05. Despite the media about it taking 8 years to win a flag, this was a quick turnaround. If GFC had finished 13th and 14th in 04/05 I doubt he would be there or I would have been headhunted for jobs in 2004 and 2005!
I think this is a very simplistic and poorly researched argument that is being put forward about youth and the AFL and coaching. ALF is only a National Sport. Why are these journo so closed in their thinking and only use the AFL as a rationale for their articles. AFL is an elite sport in OZ, not the world. There are 800 odd players. Not too many are elite! If it was so easy heaps of UK teams would employ young UK coaches. They tried a few times and agghhh!
I always looked outside the AFL for changes required. IE In elite sport. Soccer/Rugby/Hockey and so on. Obviously we have taken “years” to copy soccer with tactics. Geez Zoning! New? That is why I often went to the AIS and world soccer to look at what they were doing! In the end we don’t produce heaps of athletes as it is and our first gold medal since 1968 was won by Hooker.
So in this argument about who to employ as coaches simply look at sport in the world and then the needs of AFL . AFL is not a unique sport. It is sport with unique needs. It isn’t rocket science.
And examine the evolution of the AFL and also why young coaches came flooding through. They were simply working full time in the AFL since the late 90’s and basically players who were just retired were employed. Old 60’s and 70’s players rarely got assistant jobs. But now heaps of 45 year olds can be sophisticated IT gurus!
Sad that some “GUN” 45 year old coach may not get a job. Someone has to win a flag every year so if they are all “young” then a young coach will win. In the end the AFL is a manipulated sport where squads spit players out and lots of underprepared kids play, given the system in place with “kiddie” programs.
Average age of AFL players in Grand Finals is 25.6
Average age of elite coaches in the world?????? Who knows? Who cares!!!!
If I can get a 21 year old to coach me to win the Veterans 50-55 100m title I will listen as I will listen to an 80 year old.
I always have to remember that the AFL media, in general, does not go past the obvious.
Ciao
Long Term Athletic Development LTAD at Collingwood
Here I am at Collingwood Athletics Track supervising Brunswick Zebra’s 11 year old goalkeeper ( Yanni Matzaris) doing his footwork on Sunday morning 22 March 2009.
But is this LTAD gone mad. 4 year old Joshua Mercuri is ready to fly at the end of this explosive but zig zag parachute run! Too young. Ha. He loved it and tried as hard as he could to get airborne. Josh’s dad Tony owns the 24 hour gym ( Five Star) in Thomastown.
And here is his 7 year old brother Adam. So fast the picture is blurred. HA. But he also loved it. The secind picture also demonstrates some multidirectional training, or maybe just being blown off course!
Marija Mirkovic, Yanni and Con Matzaris are doign a few strides down the track. Marija won the National Junior Tennis singles and doubles championships in 2008 and I assist her with fitness. Marija is off to Europe for 6 months on Monday and today did a short speed session before heading off. She is rapidly improving her ranking and will use Belgrade as a base for the ocming months. She is a very hard trainer and super fit aerobcally and I am sure that with more tennis and more power work she will kepp improving.
Adam come back!
Yanni Matzaris and dad Con after a good session.
Marija slamming a medicine ball into the wall working those obliques.
And Marija doing some “off the mark” training.
This is “moi” and Marija. How to ruin a good shot eh!
And back to Joshua tryig to fly again!
And Adam working those glutes with parachute straining behind.
Look dad!!!!!
Guees what FUN!
Ciao
AFL FOOTBALL, HAMSTRING INJURY and GPS
Hamstring Injury is on the rise again it seems in the AFL. Yet we are seeing the AFL gloat about how the rules have changed the game and made it less dangerous for contact injury and link this to the rule changes. An article by Damian Barret quoted the decrease in high intensity running in the GPS report.
“THE AFL’S GPS data from the 2008 season has revealed a fourth consecutive increase in “playing intensity”.
Among results that delight AFL football operations manager Adrian Anderson, who has introduced a raft of rule changes, the 2008 season saw players spend less time at “high-end speeds” and more time at “steady-state running speeds”.
The report quoted Adrian Anderson noting the decrease in collision injuries since 2004 but of course we also have had far more stringet tribunal decsions with head high contact cases for example. So one has to be a little wary of making rash conclusions with this GPS research. Also the report said that ball in play had increased over 10% since the 2001/2002 season but of course one must remember that extensive GPS use was not occuring then.
“Anderson said there were strong warnings at the end of 2004 that the game had moved too far to a stop-start style and, as a result, players were suffering serious collision injuries because when the ball was in play, they found themselves playing at a higher speed”
So why have Hamstring and Groin injuries increased?
The attention to detail in the area of soft tissue management is pristine these days in the AFL. What this report totally misses and what GPS really struggles with is that there is a maximal instantaneous muscular effort occuring time and time agan in a game. So whilst players are fatigued due to less rest thay are still contracting at maximal effort close to the ball increasing the risk of soft tissue injury. GPS does have accelerometers that measure impact forces but again this is not measuring the maximal contraction of a fatigued muscle.
And added to this problem is the massive interchange numbers which means a fresh player comes on a totally fatigued player and adds to the need to maximally accelerate at an instantaneous moment. WHACK more injury. Fatigue causes loss of efficiency in movement apart from other problems that expose soft tissue to injury.
So whilst a player may be cruising at a slightly lower speed they still have to bend and crank 100% effort many times over and in a more fatigued state. Just not something a GPS can measure. That is, the massive instantaneous eccentric contractions that occur at maximal intensity compounded by the fight or flight response.
So again we see the flawed use of statistics and technology. GPS was fantastic to allow sports scientists a clearer picture of game loads and variations from training to games for example. Coupled with HR data and subjective data and linked to video one can really analyze general game loads for AFL players.
Reality all that may have happened is that the rule changes have changed work/rest ratios and meant that coaches have to select slightly more “aerobically” biased teams with a result that players are running around slightly more fatgued than in the past. So yes it may nicer to watch but one can see where soft tissue is strainign even more now. And also one would have to look at the rule changes with collision injuries to judge whether that has been the main reason for less contact injuries.
It is the old story. One can use statistics to justify most scenarios. And also as in the grand final one will see a lot more euse of tactics that will again change many variables.
Little Athletics is not a good pathway for Track and Field excellence
Recently there has been a lot of discussion about problems in Track and Field. From sponsorship to simply numbers competing. There also have been suggestions that Athletics Australia does not provide a pathway for kids that do Little Athletics. So much has changed since the 60’s prior to when Little Athletic started.
We don’t have University systems such as collegiate track and field in the US. We don’t have systems with the armed services and police force such as exist in many countries. We do not have clubs aligned to big sports clubs such as in Europe. Senior clubs in Australia are a throwback to the 50’s. Funded and run by total well meaning amateurs.
So why do I think Little Athletics is flawed as a pathway for Senor Track and Field. Before I start I want to emohasise that from a physical point of view it is great that kids are running around on weekends with little athletics. But that is not the point of this article. How come thousands of kids and parents are involved in Little Athletics and these parents and kids drop out later? Is it simply Athletic Australia’s fault. No.
From a mulitalteral development perspective Athletics is not the best pursuit for kids to do prior to puberty. It involves closed skills, unilateral loadings and winning and losing at an individual level. There is no decision making and no team interplay. Much research has shown that multilateral development is the key for prepubertal kids and also games are best pursued to develop decision making skills, aerobic fitness and speed and have fun. Sports such as swinning and gymnastics are great for strength. And so on. This stuff is all out there.
Also up till 15 or 16 there are massive differences in development and maturation so who wins one year may simply be an average senior athlete. Average age for senior athletics for excellence is always approximately 25. So if your child wins an under 11 title it may be 8/12 years before any real performances start happening. 2009 now so wait till 2016 to make a semifinal of the under 19’s in senir aths!!
Parents have a huge involvement at this age and often with great intentions ( health and fitness) but soemtimes for not so noble reasons. That is they become involved in the whole win/loss cycle.
My memories of the best talents coming through were young footballers or hockey players who turned up at the track and ran 11 5 secs for 100m with no formal training off a base of multilateral devleopment.
i will continue this discussion but simply starting Athletics too early is flawed. It is a simple sport that requires massive dedication and should be grabbing kids from other sports at 14,15,16,17 and so on.
Councils need to get behind senior clubs and now is the time to pay coaches at the many tracks to help these kids that want to do Athletics as a choice at 15 etc and not because their parents took themt o Little Aths at 10.
How ugly is it for a kid who won medals at 10/11 and 12 in athletics to be beaten at a school sports at 15 by a kid who only has played soccer. Now that kid is bound to give up and also of course any involvement of parents in athletics is over given the excitiement of seeing little johnny is over.
All food for thought eh!
Ciao
loris bertolacci 