Are natural footballers 'born'....?

stumpypeeps

flahavaj wrote: »

How then are some players better than others? Is football skill simply a product of how hard you work in the formative years? It can't just be that. The likes of Best and Maradona had something else that can't be taught.

I suggest some football players are better than others because they have been coached better, practiced longer from an early age and had a mental determination to work hard. Variations in physical attributes obviously influence a player but not as much as one might think.

flahavaj

stumpypeeps wrote: »

I suggest some football players are better than others because they have been coached better, practiced longer from an early age and had a mental determination to work hard. Variations in physical attributes obviously influence a player but not as much as one might think.

No way is it all down to coaching, practice and determination. They are massive but they're not the be all and end all.

tallaghtmick

mars bar wrote: »

Anyway, Messi at 10 years of age apparently.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMq9JbYR_no

in before everyone to say thats not really messi its me :pac::pac::pac:

Pinturicchio

mars bar wrote: »

And 3 years later he was playing for Newell's Old Boys. "Newell's is also notable for their youth divisions, being the club with most national titles in AFA's youth tournaments."

I would love to know how many coaching badges Messi's dad had. Messi's natural ability was identified and nurtured at Newell's Old Boys and then perfected beyond belief at Barcelona.

In between the two it was overlooked by Calcio Como.

Mars Bar

bamboozling wrote: »

Its coming down to semantics at this stage.

Imo 'Natural Ability' is a handy phrase which is a fallacy really. What makes up natural ability is speed, Decision making, reflexes, coordination, balance and many tangible and intangible things.

Maradona and other all time greats consisted of all the above and then having the application to become brilliant.

That's what 'natural ability' is, mental and physical attributes that you more skill level than other players.

Stumpypeeps is saying (I think, not wanting to put words in his mouth) that you aren't born with any of these.

I'd imagine that you are born with whatever speed you can achieve. I'm as slow as **** and no amount of running around and short sprints at a young age would have made me any faster.

Decision making. Yes a lot of it can be attributed to development but some people are just naturally slow at making their mind up (Carrick for example) and some people just know what to do in a millisecond (Scholes).

Using goalkeepers here for this one.
Reflexes, I'd bet that someone who was born with ridiculous reflexes would probably have a better chance at making it pro than someone who has been developed into being a goalkeeper because they weren't quick enough to be an out field player.

To be honest, this could go around and around in circles! I'll imagine us agreeing to disagree on this one.

thebaz

for me 99.9% who make it are born with something a bit special - be it speed, co-ordination, balance, natural special vision - the likes of maradonna, ronaldo, rhonaldinho, messi have a talent that just can not be tought - some who work very hard , can make it - but making it in football is so hard even with exceptional ability , making it with average ability is near impossible - i do wonder what kind of footballer roy keane was at 14 ?? and look what he achieved with hard work

sonic85

bamboozling wrote: »

Its coming down to semantics at this stage.

Imo 'Natural Ability' is a handy phrase which is a fallacy really. What makes up natural ability is speed, Decision making, reflexes, coordination, balance and many tangible and intangible things.

Maradona and other all time greats consisted of all the above and then having the application to become brilliant.

That's what 'natural ability' is, mental and physical attributes that you more skill level than other players.

I think Stumpy is phrasing it too strongly these are attributes you have its up to the person to find the sport or activity that best suites them. Example I'm 6' 3" and 17 stone. Much and all as I like soccer it was never a game that suited me so I play 5 a side once or twice a week. Rugby suites me, I play for a club at a decent level..

but thats the thing though - you cant teach someone how to be fast or how to make a decision in a split second these are natural attributes that people have.

sonic85

ha ha - mars bar got there before me!

bamboozling

sonic85 wrote: »

but thats the thing though - you cant teach someone how to be fast or how to make a decision in a split second these are natural attributes that people have.

I think you might be taking me up wrong. I don't think there is natural ability per se. What there is is natural or genetic attributes like the ones I listed that determine the type of body and brain you have. Then when honed, coached in a proper environment well that's how good and indeed great players come about.

stumpypeeps

mars bar wrote: »

Stumpypeeps is saying (I think, not wanting to put words in his mouth) that you aren't born with any of these.

I'd imagine that you are born with whatever speed you can achieve. I'm as slow as **** and no amount of running around and short sprints at a young age would have made me any faster.

Decision making. Yes a lot of it can be attributed to development but some people are just naturally slow at making their mind up (Carrick for example) and some people just know what to do in a millisecond (Scholes).

Using goalkeepers here for this one.
Reflexes, I'd bet that someone who was born with ridiculous reflexes would probably have a better chance at making it pro than someone who has been developed into being a goalkeeper because they weren't quick enough to be an out field player.

To be honest, this could go around and around in circles! I'll imagine us agreeing to disagree on this one.

I think your physical attributes contribute to the type of player you become but have less to do with your success than practice, repetition and the quality of coaching you receive and how early that coaching begins.

I think many of those physical attributes are developed from the ages of 3 to 12 when your mind as well as your body is shaped by the environment its in.

Mars Bar

bamboozling wrote: »

I think you might be taking me up wrong. I don't think there is natural ability per se. What there is is natural or genetic attributes like the ones I listed that determine the type of body and brain you have. Then when honed, coached in a proper environment well that's how good and indeed great players come about.

Well then we're in agreement. Just not using the same phrase.

Maybe a genetic inheritance might be better phrase.

bamboozling

mars bar wrote: »

Well then we're in agreement. Just not using the same phrase.

Maybe a genetic inheritance might be better phrase.

In agreement with a United fan? Me?

Well I never actually, no we're in disagreement now that I think about it!!

stumpypeeps

One last post which is testament to the fact that practice, coaching and environment makes champions. This concerns the Omega table tennis club in Reading, where a quality coach operated the club for local kids to play table tennis.

Omega was not a luxurious club – it was a one-table hut in a
gravel enclosure a couple of miles from where we lived in
suburban Reading: cold in winter, ferociously hot in summer,
with plants growing through the roof and floor. But it had one advantage that made it almost unique in the county: it was open
twenty-four hours a day, for the exclusive use of its tiny group
of members, each of whom had a set of keys.
My brother and I took full advantage, training after school,
before school, at weekends, and during school holidays. We
were also joined by other Aldryngton alumni who had been
spotted and snapped up by Charters, so that by 1981 Omega was
becoming something of a sensation. One street alone (Silverdale
Road, on which the school was situated) contained an aston -
ishing number of the nation’s top players.
At numbber 119 were the Syeds. Andrew, my brother, went
on to become one of the most successful junior players in the
history of British table tennis, winning three national titles
before retiring due to injury in 1986. He was later described by
Charters as the best young player to emerge from England for a
quarter of a century. Matthew (that’s me) also lived at 119 and
became a long-serving England senior number one, a three-time
Commonwealth champion, and a two-time Olympian.
At number 274, just opposite Aldryngton, lived Karen Witt.
She was one of the most brilliant female players of her gener -
ation. She won countless junior titles, the national senior title,
the hugely prestigious Commonwealth championship, and
dozens of other competitions during a sparkling career. When
she retired with back trouble at the age of twenty-five, she had
changed the face of English women’s table tennis.
At number 149, equidistant between the Syeds and the Witts,
lived Andy Wellman. He was a powerful player who would go
on to win a series of titles, mainly in doubles, and was widely
feared, particularly after defeating one of the top English players
in the prestigious Top 12 event.
At the bottom of Silverdale Road was Paul Trott, another
leading junior, and Keith Hodder, an outstanding county player. Around the corner were Jimmy Stokes (England junior cham -
pion), Paul Savins (junior international), Alison Gordon (four
times English senior champion), Paul Andrews (top national
player), and Sue Collier (England schools champion). I could
go on.
For a period in the 1980s, this one street, and the surrounding
vicinity, produced more outstanding table tennis players than
the rest of the nation combined. One road among tens of thou -
sands of roads; one tiny cohort of schoolkids against millions
up and down the country. Silverdale Road was the wellspring of
English table tennis: a Ping-Pong mecca that seemed to defy
explanation or belief.

Blatter

Let me share some examples from the history of sport.

Muhammad Ali was not considered a natural fighter. He had the wrong body proportions, for a start. While he was quick, he lacked strength and he lacked the classic moves. Carol Dweck, in her book Mindset (which I recommend as one of the greatest books on the psychology of motivation ever written), writes that Ali "boxed all wrong. He didn't block punches with his arms and elbows. He punched in rallied like an amateur. He kept his jaw exposed. He pulled back his torso to evade the impact of oncoming punches" rather than dodging left or right.

In hindsight experts reflect on his natural talent and physique. We see the body of a great boxer. Yet Ali's work ethic and ability to tactically psyche out his opponents before a fight made him the fighter he became.

The second example is Michael Jordan. Everyone knows he was cut from his high-school basketball team - and in hindsight we mock the coach that dropped him. Jordan never got recruited by the college team he wanted and in his first NBA draft two teams bypassed him for other players. Couldn't they see his natural talent? Jordan became known as the man who practiced longer and harder than ANY other player in the NBA. His work ethic is what made him great... not any natural ability.

Of course the myth of natural ability is a handy cop-out for people not doing so well in their given sport. If I'm not naturally gifted, then my poor performance is not "my" fault. It's genetics conspiring against me.

There's no such thing as naturals. There are simply those who train their bodies and minds longer, more precisely, more deliberately, and harder than everyone else.

Mars Bar

stumpypeeps wrote: »

I think your physical attributes contribute to the type of player you become but have less to do with your success than practice, repetition and the quality of coaching you receive and how early that coaching begins.

I think many of those physical attributes are developed from the ages of 3 to 12 when your mind as well as your body is shaped by the environment its in.

Well I can't disagree with that to be honest coz it's not a false statement.

But players like Messi, both Ronaldo's, Best, Maradona, Pele etc... were all a level above all others. But how? It had to be something they inherited? I've already acknowledged that you need to practice, practice, practice to become a pro, but what makes you stand out?

Beckham and Gary Neville had to put in oodles and oodles of work to get where they got to. They might have put more work in that the players mentioned above to get anywhere near that level. So there had to be something that made those players better than Beckham or Neville.

FlawedGenius

stumpypeeps wrote: »

To be honest, at 8 and having only kicked a ball 10 months ago, I'd say he's too late to ever become a great football player.

You cant be serious???????:eek: Id say about half of professional footballers only start kicking a ball after 8.

Mars Bar

By the way, credit to Fittle for starting the conversation. It's a really good debate!

FlawedGenius

stumpypeeps wrote: »

There is no such thing as natural ability, only the amount of time and effort dedicated and the quality of that time between childhood and adolescence.

Golf is a game of huge ability, much more so than football. Motor racing requires phenomenal stamina (lose up to 10 to 15 kilos during certain races and heart rate remains over 150 bpm for the duration) and amazing reactions. All of which are ingrained at an early age.

:eek: Probably the stupidest post Ive ever read on this forum.. You havent a clue. Natural ability is as simple as picking up a sport or a subject quicker than most people.
Some people could play all day but theyl always be brutal, because of things like Co-ordination, decision making/concentraton/ability to think fast IE "a football brain".

stumpypeeps

FlawedGenius wrote: »

You cant be serious???????:eek: Id say about half of professional footballers only start kicking a ball after 8.

He's at a serious disadvantage. Most kids start kicking a football from at least 4 years of age.

Blatter

mars bar wrote: »

Well I can't disagree with that to be honest coz it's not a false statement.

But players like Messi, both Ronaldo's, Best, Maradona, Pele etc... were all a level above all others. But how? It had to be something they inherited? I've already acknowledged that you need to practice, practice, practice to become a pro, but what makes you stand out?

What makes you stand out is exceptional coaching, coupled with practicing that bit harder and that bit longer than the others.

Look at David Beckham, he wasn't blessed with good pace or agility. Yet he made it at the top because it's a well known fact that he used to practice longer than anybody else and was ridiculously dedicated.

His free kick, crossing, passing ability was not natural, it was developed. He wasn't born with it, he worked damn hard for it.

Mars Bar

stumpypeeps wrote: »

He's at a serious disadvantage. Most kids start kicking a football from at least 4 years of age.

I agree with this for the most part.

Only someone very special would be able to start late and make a successful career out of football.

Mars Bar

SOCCER4LIFE wrote: »

What makes you stand out is exceptional coaching, coupled with practicing that bit harder and that bit longer than the others.

Look at David Beckham, he wasn't blessed with good pace or agility. Yet he made it at the top because it's a well known fact that he used to practice longer than anybody else and was ridiculously dedicated.

His free kick, crossing, passing ability was not natural, it was developed. He wasn't born with it, he worked damn hard for it.

Completely true. He had to work extra hard to get there.

Now, say Messi worked as equally as hard as Beckham. What makes Messi so much more better than Beckham?

sonic85

SOCCER4LIFE wrote: »

What makes you stand out is exceptional coaching, coupled with practicing that bit harder and that bit longer than the others.

Look at David Beckham, he wasn't blessed with good pace or agility. Yet he made it at the top because it's a well known fact that he used to practice longer than anybody else and was ridiculously dedicated.

His free kick, crossing, passing ability was not natural, it was developed. He wasn't born with it, he worked damn hard for it.

beckham is the most celebrated case - any others? theres not many footballers i can think of like beckham that got to the very top of the sport

stumpypeeps

mars bar wrote: »

Completely true. He had to work extra hard to get there.

Now, say Messi worked as equally as hard as Beckham. What makes Messi so much more better than Beckham?

Better coaching. he moved to Barcelona at 11 I think, got completely immersed in the philosophy there. The one intangible that i do admit I can't really account for is speed. His speed and acceleration make him the type of player he is. However, if he didn't have that, he would be a different type of player but still a world class one. Perhaps he'd be more Xavi or Iniesta but still magnificent.

stumpypeeps

sonic85 wrote: »

beckham is the most celebrated case - any others? theres not many footballers i can think of like beckham that got to the very top of the sport

I dare say if you asked anyone close to any great player, they'll tell you the effort and determination they put into becoming great was what set them apart.

Mars Bar

stumpypeeps wrote: »

Better coaching. he moved to Barcelona at 11 I think, got completely immersed in the philosophy there. The one intangible that i do admit I can't really account for is speed. His speed and acceleration make him the type of player he is. However, if he didn't have that, he would be a different type of player but still a world class one. Perhaps he'd be more Xavi or Iniesta but still magnificent.

I was gonna edit saying apart from the fact that Beckham had the misfortune of being trained in England!

I wonder if we had video footage of Beckham at the age of 7 and Messi at the age of 7 (I pick this age as it's pre Barcelona era for Messi), who would have shown the potential to go on to be a great player.

I bet Messi by a million light years. Simply coz Messi was showing at that age, the potential and a "natural ability" to play football intelligently without the pro coaching.

heavyballs

mars bar wrote: »

Completely true. He had to work extra hard to get there.

Now, say Messi worked as equally as hard as Beckham. What makes Messi so much more better than Beckham?

having grown up with a couple of ex premier league players and 2 present one's i'm trying to think what seperated them from me(i just played LOI).

When i think of those who made it growing up they wern't that brilliant but one thing was they had defo more natural athletic ability than the rest of us but not as much skill.
i think as a scout now you give one of these14/15 year olds on the bleep test and the one's who can get close to finishing it can be moulded into a decent player.
i remember many years ago playing with Stephen Carr at aged 14 and thinking 'How the f*** does he have a beard already?'The chap was never overly skillfull but was very physical and a lot faster than the rest and very developed for his age.

Blatter

mars bar wrote: »

Completely true. He had to work extra hard to get there.

Now, say Messi worked as equally as hard as Beckham. What makes Messi so much more better than Beckham?

Well I would say Beckham didn't have the same physical attributes as Messi. As I said, he wasn't blessed with good pace, agility etc. So he just can't physically do what Messi can do. But just because Messi had these physical attributes, you can't say he was born with natural 'talent' because in truth many kids have these attributes.

stumpypeeps

Interesting debate by all accounts. A break from jeering rival fans about the quality of their players and support.

Mars Bar

heavyballs wrote: »

having grown up with a couple of ex premier league players and 2 present one's i'm trying to think what seperated them from me(i just played LOI).

When i think of those who made it growing up they wern't that brilliant but one thing was they had defo more natural athletic ability than the rest of us but not as much skill.
i think as a scout now you give one of these14/15 year olds on the bleep test and the one's who can get close to finishing it can be moulded into a decent player.
i remember many years ago playing with Stephen Carr at aged 14 and thinking 'How the f*** does he have a beard already?'The chap was never overly skillfull but was very physical and a lot faster than the rest and very developed for his age.

That's what I'm saying.

Players being scouted by English clubs are probably picked on their natural athleticism. Something they have been born with. With the English game being fast and physical, this is what suits. Seeing as those who are picked are already showing the attributes needed for the style, they'll have these attributes developed.

Spanish and South American football is much more about technical ability and intelligence and then speed is a bonus. These players know that the football can move faster than the player. Messi was clearly showing from a young age that he could control a ball like a kid beyond his years. Well what do you know, that's Barcelona's style. He was picked up by them as they saw he possessed the raw attributes naturally and they developed him.

FlawedGenius

SOCCER4LIFE wrote: »

Natural talent is a myth IMO.

As others have said, what makes somebody a great footballer is Three things.

1.Start playing at an early age.
2.Have good coaches and be thought how to play properly.(This is important. Remember practice dosent make perfect, perfect practice makes perfect)
3.Constant practice and unbelievable dedication.

This is shown throughout the world, Brazil and Argentina produce the best footballers in the world. It's no surprise that both these countries are embroiled in poverty and their kids play football for hours and hours a day.

Another ridicilous post.. What about the players who worked there bums off to become professional footballers like Gary Neville and Roy Keane etc, why arent they as good as Messi and Ronaldo if thats all it takes is hard work, becuase trust me they worked hell of a lot harder than Ronaldo, Messi, Gascoigne and Best (natural players)???
Really great players needed to work hard and practice hard but the game would come a lot easier for them and theyd learn quicker because of there natural talent.. They dont have to work hard as your average person, look at Gascoigne and Best even when they drank like fishes they were still fantastic footballers and got by because of there natural ability..
Look at Messi at age 10, clear to see he was just better than everyone else and I doubt he was playing a lot more than his friends.. You never lose your natural ability and if a kid is amazing at a young age chances are hel be at least very good when hes older, depends on the teenage years and how dedicated someone is and how they grow
.. Why are the best footballers generally shorter? Football suits people who are nippy and coordinated on the ball and with a low centre of gravity, basketball is easier if your 7 foot etc.

New Zealand and Kilkenny, the one sport dominates here so any decent athlete will probably play Hurling or Rugby, so obviously there going to produce more professional players than anywere else, 99% of players in these places though would still be nowhere near good enough for another county or country. That doesnt mean they have no natural players, chances are the more natural ones excelled above the other players who worked really hard and still werent good enough.

flahavaj

stumpypeeps wrote: »

Better coaching. he moved to Barcelona at 11 I think, got completely immersed in the philosophy there. The one intangible that i do admit I can't really account for is speed. His speed and acceleration make him the type of player he is. However, if he didn't have that, he would be a different type of player but still a world class one. Perhaps he'd be more Xavi or Iniesta but still magnificent.

There are also other things like the low centre of gravity Maradona had. You can't teach that.

Blatter

FlawedGenius wrote: »

Another ridicilous post.. What about the players who worked there bums off to become professional footballers like Gary Neville and Roy Keane etc, why arent they as good as Messi and Ronaldo if thats all it takes is hard work, becuase trust me they worked hell of a lot harder than Ronaldo, Messi, Gascoigne and Best (natural players)???
Really great players needed to work hard and practice hard but the game would come a lot easier for them and theyd learn quicker because of there natural talent.. They dont have to work hard as your average person, look at Gascoigne and Best even when they drank like fishes they were still fantastic footballers and got by because of there natural ability..
Look at Messi at age 10, clear to see he was just better than everyone else and I doubt he was playing a lot more than his friends.. You never lose your natural ability and if a kid is amazing at a young age chances are hel be at least very good when hes older, depends on the teenage years and how dedicated someone is and how they grow
.. Why are the best footballers generally shorter? Football suits people who are nippy and coordinated on the ball and with a low centre of gravity, basketball is easier if your 7 foot etc.

New Zealand and Kilkenny, the one sport dominates here so any decent athlete will probably play Hurling or Rugby, so obviously there going to produce more professional players than anywere else, 99% of players in these places though would still be not be near good enough for another county or country. That doesnt mean they have no natural players, chances are the more natural ones excelled above the other players who worked really hard and still werent good enough.

Ridiculous post? Do me a favour...


Why wasn't Roy Keane and Gary Neville as good as Ronaldo, Messi etc.?

Easy.

1.Didn't have the same physical attributes(speed, acceleration, agility etc.)
2.Coached in Ireland and England respectively, much poorer standard of coaching.

stumpypeeps

mars bar wrote: »

That's what I'm saying.

Players being scouted by English clubs are probably picked on their natural athleticism. Something they have been born with. With the English game being fast and physical, this is what suits. Seeing as those who are picked are already showing the attributes needed for the style, they'll have these attributes developed.

Spanish and South American football is much more about technical ability and intelligence and then speed is a bonus. These players know that the football can move faster than the player. Messi was clearly showing from a young age that he could control a ball like a kid beyond his years. Well what do you know, that's Barcelona's style. He was picked up by them as they saw he possessed the raw attributes naturally and they developed him.

As long as that is the criteria, England and probably Ireland will suffer from a lack of quality international players.

FlawedGenius

stumpypeeps wrote: »

He's at a serious disadvantage. Most kids start kicking a football from at least 4 years of age.

No hes not would you cop on.. You said you cant make if you start playing after 8, stupid thing to say. Thats wrong anyway because Ive heard of lots of players who only start playing at 11 or 12, which is late infairness, but they still turned out to be great players, one of the top of my head is Theo Walcott.

stumpypeeps

flahavaj wrote: »

There are also other things like the low centre of gravity Maradona had. You can't teach that.

I think those criteria determine the type of player you become but not whether your a successful professional. For instance I dare say Xabi Alonso is one of the slowest players in world football, however, he doesn't rely on his speed, he's developed passing, positional and vision attributes to make the most of his physical limitations. He's still one of the best players I've seen play.

Mars Bar

SOCCER4LIFE wrote: »

Ridiculous post? Do me a favour...


Why wasn't Roy Keane and Gary Neville as good as Ronaldo, Messi etc.?

Easy.

1.Didn't have the same physical attributes(speed, acceleration, agility etc.)
2.Coached in Ireland and England respectively, much poorer standard of coaching.

This is kind of what I'm getting at.

Speed has to be something to do with you genes or something you possess inside you. Something you were born with. It will make you stand out.

Blatter

FlawedGenius wrote: »

No hes not would you cop on.. You said you cant make if you start playing after 8, stupid thing to say. Thats wrong anyway because Ive heard of lots of players who only start playing at 11 or 12, which is late infairness, but they still turned out to be great players, one of the top of my head is Theo Walcott.

There are exceptions to every rule.

The fact is that players who make it professionally that start playing before 8 far outweighs the players that make it professionally that start playing after 8.

Your tone of posting is fairly ignorant, cut it out we're having a decent debate here.

Zapp Brannigan

If natural talent doesn't exist, explain Le Tiss?

Blatter

mars bar wrote: »

This is kind of what I'm getting at.

Speed has to be something to do with you genes or something you possess inside you. Something you were born with. It will make you stand out.

I agree, but several people I know possess this trait, dosen't mean ya can say they have a natural footballing ''talent''. Sure, they had the potential to be like Messi, Ronaldo etc. more than someone slow as **** but I don't think that potential = natural talent simply because it isn't all that rare.

sonic85

stumpypeeps wrote: »

I think those criteria determine the type of player you become but not whether your a successful professional. For instance I dare say Xabi Alonso is one of the slowest players in world football, however, he doesn't rely on his speed, he's developed passing, positional and vision attributes to make the most of his physical limitations. He's still one of the best players I've seen play.

hes a good example actually. didnt he spend a summer here in ireland as an exchange student? he played football with the locals and i think i read somewhere he was very ordinary. look how he turned out.

stumpypeeps

mars bar wrote: »

This is kind of what I'm getting at.

Speed has to be something to do with you genes or something you possess inside you. Something you were born with. It will make you stand out.

I have to agree that speed is one asset that can make a difference in football and probably most team sports. However, it only gets you so far. Dennis Rommedahl can run the 100 m in 10.5 or something. Not particularly great though as a footballer.

Mars Bar

stumpypeeps wrote: »

As long as that is the criteria, England and probably Ireland will suffer from a lack of quality international players.

Definitely.

stumpypeeps wrote: »

I think those criteria determine the type of player you become but not whether your a successful professional. For instance I dare say Xabi Alonso is one of the slowest players in world football, however, he doesn't rely on his speed, he's developed passing, positional and vision attributes to make the most of his physical limitations. He's still one of the best players I've seen play.

And to get to his level, you have to display your ability to be technical on the ball (which is down to a lot of practice, I give you that). I believe your positional sense and vision is something you possess, something that comes naturally to you coz at a young age, you wouldn't have the experience to have developed it.

I remember seeing a video of Torres at a really young age playing a match and the football those young lads were playing was phenomenal. Football we could only wish we could teach and implement here. Torres was clearly an intelligent player at a young age.

FlawedGenius

To sum it up Id say, a mix of natural talent(even just above average), practice/dedication, commitment and LUCK - probably the most important.
By the way the OP must be trolling a bit as some of the things she has said:rolleyes: Hope your kid doesnt read it in a few years!!:eek:
I know lots of players that COULD have made it but through lack of commitment/fooking up opportunities, bad luck, they didnt, also know players that were average/slightly above average but made it, again, luck, having the dedication, knowing somebody:rolleyes:. You see players and wonder how they ever got near professional football nevermind the Premiership - MCSHANE, an example to anybody that they can make it if they work hard.
Great topic though have discussed it many a time over the years.:)

flahavaj

stumpypeeps wrote: »

I think those criteria determine the type of player you become but not whether your a successful professional. For instance I dare say Xabi Alonso is one of the slowest players in world football, however, he doesn't rely on his speed, he's developed passing, positional and vision attributes to make the most of his physical limitations. He's still one of the best players I've seen play.

I don't really think you can train someone into having the footballing brain and vision that midfielders like Alonso, Xavi and Scholes have. They see things that others don't, they have brains like computers. You can't train that into anyone. Its God given talent.

sonic85

flahavaj wrote: »

I don't really think you can train someone into having the footballing brain and vision that midfielders like Alonso, Xavi and Scholes have. They see things that others don't, they have brains like computers. You can't train that into anyone. Its God given talent.

they know what theyre going to do with the ball before they even get it. spot a pass and execute it in the blink of an eye - such quick thinking cant be taught you just have to have it

Mars Bar

SOCCER4LIFE wrote: »

I agree, but several people I know possess this trait, dosen't mean ya can say they have a natural footballing ''talent''. Sure, they had the potential to be like Messi, Ronaldo etc. more than someone slow as **** but I don't think that potential = natural talent simply because it isn't all that rare.

I completely get what you're saying but...

I know what I'm trying to say in my head but I dunno if it's coming out right and I'm tired!

Personally, I believe that outstanding players like Messi have something in them that makes them stand out. Like they got the full package and then got the right people to develop them. Look at Nani, Nani was definitely born without the footballing brain that Ronaldo has. Yes, Ronaldo's decision making has improved and so has Nani's but from a young age, Ronaldo's apptitude for good decision making would have outweighed Nani's.

sonic85 wrote: »

hes a good example actually. didnt he spend a summer here in ireland as an exchange student? he played football with the locals and i think i read somewhere he was very ordinary. look how he turned out.

I bet he looked ordinary coz the style is different and he probably had to wear shin guards to keep his ankles on and nobody on his team was probably on the same wave length as him!

Fight_Night

Natural players are not born. Unless you have a disability or suffer from dysprexia(sp?) or something else that results in bad co-ordination, you can make it professionally, with a bit of luck of course.

Sports at the end of the day are a genetic lottery. However team sports like football, rugby or American football happen to cater for pretty much everyone. If you are a lanky 6'4 lad, sorry to say you won't be the next Pele, doesn't mean that if you put in the necessary work you couldn't make a good keeper or centre back or whatever. If you're one of those people like me who is 5'6 well you're never going to make it as a centre back but Messi is 5'7 and he's doing just fine. People will argue that you need to be born with pace, but in reality you can compensate your lack of pace with something else be it ball control/having a football brain etc. People always get disillusioned when they hear 'natural player'. It doesn't necessarily mean the player with the most skills or the player who scores the most.

With regards to your son, I'd encourage him 100% to play football. Send him to some football camps, he'll make some friends and get better at football. Take him to the park and do a few drills with him, you know yourself. He probably won't make it to the Pros but ambition is something that should be encouraged and it is a very good quality to have.

''Life's battles don't always go to the stronger or faster man. But sooner or later the man who wins, is the man who thinks he can''

Very clichéd but it's true.

stumpypeeps

flahavaj wrote: »

I don't really think you can train someone into having the footballing brain and vision that midfielders like Alonso, Xavi and Scholes have. They see things that others don't, they have brains like computers. You can't train that into anyone. Its God given talent.

This is where I fundamentally disagree. This is where I believe practice, repetition, coaching from a very early age helps to develop these assets. Its not that they see things that others don't, its that they have been in this situation before and learned to deal with it properly. Its all learned behaviour. Thats why over time Scholes became better and better, most players make better decisions as they get older. Its all learned in my opinion.

Mars Bar

stumpypeeps wrote: »

This is where I fundamentally disagree. This is where I believe practice, repetition, coaching from a very early age helps to develop these assets. Its not that they see things that others don't, its that they have been in this situation before and learned to deal with it properly. Its all learned behaviour. Thats why over time Scholes became better and better, most players make better decisions as they get older. Its all learned in my opinion.

This is where I agree with Flah.
(Not that it's a talented given by god as I'm not into that lark myself but I believe it's more the wiring of the brain.)