Go Games - Good or bad - discuss...

[heffo]

As above..

Personally I think they're excellent - smaller, conditioned games, each player seeing more of the ball, skills points - it can only improve a players development..

[oakleafgael]

They have there place but only in conjunction with some format of competitive games. Mickey Harte wrote a decent column on the issue a while back. Its important to teach younsters to lose as well as win.

[AZOffaly]

I agree with both the previous posters. You have to have winners and losers I think, and you have to have competition, because to be honest all kids compete in everything. But what the emphasis should be on is participation, and improvements, and thus the Go Games have merit with the conditioned games.

Normal games are too easy to dominate if you are the big or better kid, and it's too easy for the smaller, or weaker kids to hide. Small sided games, and modified games, allow everyone to develop, including the good big kid as well.

Also, a hugely important thing is that the parents see these games as so different to 'championship' that they are used to , that their own behaviour is much better, and focuses on the enjoyment of the game, as well as encouraging their youngsters.

I went to a club here in Tipperary one time, and it was an Under 8 'blitz'. Under 8s. Each club was allowed field one team.

13 a side.

15 minutes a side.

3 games + a 'final'.

Each club had about 10 subs. I'd say some subs saw about 15 minutes action in total, and when they were on, they just stood in the corner doing nothing.

It was an absolute joke. Would have been a great thing at under 16 or minor level, but an absolute horror show for under 8s.

The blitzes now could have 10 games of 5v5, 6v6 or whatever going on at that same time on one full sized pitch, with 120 kids or even more all playing every minute. Each game counts, and each game has winners and losers, but there's no 'final' as such.

In short, I like the concept, but I agree that there is a place for the competitive element. Kids are not stupid, they know when they win or lose, but I think it's as much to drive that point home to the parents and mentors as to the kids.

[BarryBreensBandage]

I agree AZ - we are organising friendlies on the fortnights between the Go Games blitzes for the U8s.

They are 13 a side, and an absolute nightmare, yet quite entertaining at the same time (if you are not a coach)

But the smaller 9v9 or 6v6 means they all have to play instead of trying out WWE moves on each other when the ball is not near them.

[brokencrossbar1]

Go Games should only be used in a blitz capacity and even then to a limited extent. I have spoken to people who have coached at rugby in particular and they felt that the similar system they had in fact lowered the overall level of skill. Instead of the weaker players improving, the better players became lazy and regressed as the competitive edge was removed. I feel the GAA has tried to 'ape' other sports yet in many ways they are playing into their hands by downgrading the quality of their players. I watch my sons team and remember what we were like at his age.  We were all capable of kicking with both feet.  We 2 and maybe 3 players who could score points in excess of 35 metres. We had 2 players who could score 45's. My sons team would not have those types of players.  We worked very much on the basis of developing basic skills from we were very young and there were no convoluted training drills with copious amounts of cones.

Gaelic football is a competitive 15 a side game not a babysitter for Olivia so she can go to her pilates with Julia.  I personally think for the good of the future development of the game and also for the preparation of our younger generation for very tough times we need to harden their skins and either get them ready to deal with disappointment or make winners of them.     

[ONeill]

Go Games should only be used in a blitz capacity and even then to a limited extent. I have spoken to people who have coached at rugby in particular and they felt that the similar system they had in fact lowered the overall level of skill. Instead of the weaker players improving, the better players became lazy and regressed as the competitive edge was removed. I feel the GAA has tried to 'ape' other sports yet in many ways they are playing into their hands by downgrading the quality of their players. I watch my sons team and remember what we were like at his age.  We were all capable of kicking with both feet.  We 2 and maybe 3 players who could score points in excess of 35 metres. We had 2 players who could score 45's. My sons team would not have those types of players.  We worked very much on the basis of developing basic skills from we were very young and there were no convoluted training drills with copious amounts of cones.

The other side of the coin needs to be looked at too BC. I'm sure you could identify strengths in your son's team that perhaps your team didn't possess at that age. I'd imagine there's a sharper awareness of percentage play now (less aimless hit and hope). At least that's my experience at an Antrim club for 4-12 year olds. I'm not saying it's a tactical brain drain but, compared to my own experience in East Tyrone circa 1982, there seems to be an emphasis on smarter play.

[AZOffaly]

Sorry BC, we'll have to argue this out over a few pints in Wicklow. Remember I'm talking Under 6s and 8s here. It does them absolutely, and I mean absolutely, no good to play 15 a side where they might touch the ball once in a game.

You might have had a team of supermen, but I bet you played a lot more ball in your off time, which honed those skills, like myself.

This generation does not have 12 hours in the park with no one minding them, they need to be helped do the things that we picked up from playing.

I know the coaching is much better these days, and I think the Go Games, certainly for the wee kids, is a good approach in moderation.

I'm not one for the creche approach either, that annoys my happiness, but I do think all kids learn more in small games, where they are focussing on one or two skills, and not completely on winning the game. Winning is important, but not the only thing.

Plenty of time to harden their skins when they are 12-14 and older.

[BarryBreensBandage]

Good points well made in the last few posts there.
In our scenario, we have five, maybe six players of a decent standard at U8 - when it is 13 a side, they get hammered every match, which leads to the best players becoming very despondent that they are working like mad to win, and getting nothing for it. Whereas when it drops to lesser numbers, they compete very well with the other teams and winning a few of those games keeps the enthusiasm going.

[brokencrossbar1]

They would generally be more tactically aware and certainly more unit based then we were but I believe on a pure skill level my generation were significantly more advanced and also as we played maybe 2-3 years above ourselves sometimes we were physically more advanced. I could be wrong of course and looking through Miller tainted glasses!

[ONeill]

I'd imagine Crossmaglen's success isn't an accident. Their capacity to win All-Irelands with completely different sides suggests they had/have tremendously talented coaches at underage (maybe the schools) with vision.

My experience was "use your height and your weight" and that was it. 15v15 or maybe 13v13 at U12 simply meant making sure the biggest lad was given the ball. Reams of games passed by without anyone developing as a player for that reason no matter how successful you were.

[thejuice]

Problem now is that the small player isn't getting as much chances at Senior level, you have to be about 6 foot and built like a tank.

[AZOffaly]

Problem now is that the small player isn't getting as much chances at Senior level, you have to be about 6 foot and built like a tank.

? I presume you mean at county level? Even then I'm not sure how true that is. There's a fair few lads that are neither. Maybe in Meath

[ONeill]

Problem now is that the small player isn't getting as much chances at Senior level, you have to be about 6 foot and built like a tank.

I think Tyrone have shown that's not the case. Ricey, Gormley, Jordan, Penrose, Canavan, Mulligan, Carlin, Harte, McGuigan, McCullagh, Dooher at al have provided ample evidence that dedication and talent can get you everywhere compared to the likes of Ciaran Whelan.

[brokencrossbar1]

That's just not true. There were at least 6-7 of the Cross AI winning team under 6 foot with a good few certainly not brick shit houses.   

[brokencrossbar1]

Thejuice how many of the Meath team circa 1988 were 'small men'? Buggy and Flynn maybe and that was that.