Are natural footballers 'born'....?

flahavaj

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.

I don't see then why all players who receive the level of training and hours of practice that players do at United (for example) don't develop this vision. Someone like Fletcher will never have that same vision that Scholes has. Scholes was born with it, Fletcher wasn't.

flahavaj

mars bar wrote: »

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.)

Ah yeah, the "God given talent" thing is just a turn of phrase -ya know what I mean though.

Mars Bar

flahavaj wrote: »

Ah yeah, the "God given talent" thing is just a turn of phrase -ya know what I mean though.

Yeah I do!

bamboozling

Actually now that I think about it Football against the Enemy by Simon Kuper had a fascinating article on Dinamo Kiev and how everything was about science and measuring their reflexes and other mental abilities.

This was in 1994 so way ahead of its time. Anybody who has read the book knows what I'm talking about. Its a good 5 years since I read it so I can't remember the exact details. Basically the coach was convinced that by measuring intelligence, mental and physical attributes would you be able to tell who was good enough and who wouldn't cut the mustard.

FlawedGenius

Fight_Night wrote: »

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.

I agree with everything you said except the first line and the part underlined which sort of goes back on what you said about natural players are not born? Surely by "genetic lottery" that exactly means being born with the natural talent?

flahavaj

I have to go to bed now, but I'll sum up with this - I do believe that there are a small few top class players who have a god given talent, the vision of a Bergkamp or Scholes, the low centre of gravity of a Maradona or Best the extraordinary burst of pace over short distancesof a young Brazilian Ronaldo. Some things can't be explained or taught IMHO.

I also believe that these are only the tiny few players,the absolute elite - most top teams will only have one or two of these players. I do agree with stumpy that much of what professional players do can be mastered by training and repetition and the vast majority of players (like 99%) gain their skills this way.

Great civilised debate for once btw folks, really enjoyed it.

Mars Bar

flahavaj wrote: »

I have to go to bed now, but I'll sum up with this - I do believe that there are a small few top class players who have a god given talent, the vision of a Bergkamp or Scholes, the low centre of gravity of a Maradona or Best the extraordinary burst of pace over short distancesof a young Brazilian Ronaldo. Some things can't be explained or taught IMHO.

I also believe that these are only the tiny few players,the absolute elite - most top teams will only have one or two of these players. I do agree with stumpy that much of what professional players do can be mastered by training and repetition and the vast majority of players (like 99%) gain their skills this way.

Flah has just taken everything out of my brain and put it in that post.

Thank you kind Sir!

G'night fellas.

Fight_Night

FlawedGenius wrote: »

I agree with everything you said except the first line and the part underlined which sort of goes back on what you said about natural players are not born? Surely by "genetic lottery" that exactly means being born with the natural talent?

I was trying to say that in all likelihood your genetics will restrict you from playing certain positions. But since there is so many positions in football everyone can find something that fits them.

stumpypeeps

flahavaj wrote: »

I don't see then why all players who receive the level of training and hours of practice that players do at United (for example) don't develop this vision. Someone like Fletcher will never have that same vision that Scholes has. Scholes was born with it, Fletcher wasn't.

The most formative years for any professional footballer are between the ages of 4 to 12 I believe. I can't say for certain but I would bet that Scholes practiced more and played more than Fletcher. Its the additional hours of practice that I believe separate's the good from the great.

I can give you an example from my own personal experience. I played gaelic Football continuously from 6 to 12. Hurling infrequently but had the basic skills from pucking a ball around home.

Now as soon as I got to secondary school, I was one of the better players and captained the school at all age levels in Gaelic football.

I barely made the hurling team. I had the basic skills but positionally I wasn't as strong as the guys who played hurling. I couldn't read the game as well as I could in Football.

Now physically I was the same, the games are quite similar. But the countless matches I'd played in Gaelic football made me much better at it. Likewise the guys from hurling clubs, physically strong and quick, looked a little lost at times on the pitch playing football.

Anyway, I'm rambling a bit so I'll bid you all farewell.

bamboozling

Nominated this thread for thread of the year. Absolute cracking thread throughly enjoyed participating. Kudos to everyone. Good night and good bless guys and gals.

tallaghtmick

bamboozling wrote: »

Nominated this thread for thread of the year. Absolute cracking thread throughly enjoyed participating. Kudos to everyone. Good night and good bless guys and gals.

agreed class thread and if that kid becomes a superstar we can say we rabbled about it on the internets

Fittle

Great thread lads, and thanks (I couldn't stay up as late as you lot!).

So I guess the answer really is there are a few 'born' with a natural talent (Messi etc) and others who with training and dedication become good enough to play professionally.

This really wasn't about whether or not my lad will become professional and how I can make that happen while he's 8....I know at 8, all boys are much the same on the pitch. Although I have seen a few in matches who really stand out - head and shoulders above everyone else on the pitch - I guess they are the ones born with a natural ability to kick a ball.

Anyway, great thread - got alot of out of it when I read through it again this morning, thanks:D

Dolph Starbeam

I think neither side is wrong, i am sure there are many players out there who were born with some talent and can just pick up skills quicker, and then i am sure there are a lot more who have just worked really hard from a young age. Great thread and it is a good read, no hard in the kid learning some of Ronaldos tricks, the basics are definatley the main thing to be concentrating on, if he plays enough he will get the hang of things very quickly.

gosplan

Fittle wrote: »

Well I'm not going to go through every example you just gave there...but for example...

Harry Redknapp.

I'd say Jamie was kicking a ball around the house from the day he could walk becoz his dad loved football.

But what about Luiz Suarez?

Single mother with no dad in the mix?

While we're on the topic. Have you ever seen a 2 year old that could kick the ball that hard?

Missed this thread but my 2c on the matter is.

Some people are born with a physical advantage that makes them a natural at something - Maradonna or Jonah Lomu for example.

Some people though are just natural competitors and I think this is the case for the vast majority of professional footballers. Because there's no real physique requirement for football (unless you play for Stoke City), professional footballers tend to be the ones with a mental focus on competing and a huge in-built desire to succeed.

A good example of the mental aspect of competition is Roger Federer and the whole 'ice-man' thing. For years he upped his game for important points and in tie-breaks when his opponents would often begin to make nervous mistakes. It's not endless practice and skill that enabled him to do that but attitude.

Chances are that your kids formative years have already decided whether or not he has this mental aptitude for competition.

If you got lucky, then regardless of his coordination issues he could at least emulate Kevin Kilbane.

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

Completely agree that some people are just born to be footballers. If everyone, or a lo of people have the potential to be become a pro what makes scouts choose one 8-year old over another??

Anyways, just after readin the thread on full, great debate but (and not trying to have a go at some people here) I think yeh must be deluded not to believe that natural talent doesn't play a big role in a players development and ability.

gosplan

THFC wrote: »

If everyone, or a lo of people have the potential to be become a pro what makes scouts choose one 8-year old over another??

AFAIK they generally choose everyone that can play at a particular level.

Remember reading a David James article that said many premiership clubs have like 100 registered under-tens or something ridiculous like that. Can't remember the exact stat but it was pretty shocking.

MaceFace

I have no idea, but I read an interesting book which claims that DNA is overrated and becoming good at anything just involves very deliberate practice.
He discusses Tiger Woods and Mozart in particular and says that neither were born with the talent to be great but learned it from the beginning of their lives.

dreamers75

THFC wrote: »

Completely agree that some people are just born to be footballers. If everyone, or a lo of people have the potential to be become a pro what makes scouts choose one 8-year old over another??

Anticipation and Awareness would be the biggies, as you can work on Touch and Technique.

Interested to know how the Op knows he is or isnt a natural.

parker kent

I think the simple answer is that you are born with talent and practice will bring out talent. You can improve through practice, but there has to be something there to begin with. That something could be numerous different natural talents ranging from balance, speed etc.

The sheer effort the Spanish have put into youth training is a example of how it takes more than just natural talent. There is a direct correlation between their recent successes and the training regimes and coaches they put so much work into.

Fittle

dreamers75 wrote: »

Anticipation and Awareness would be the biggies, as you can work on Touch and Technique.

Interested to know how the Op knows he is or isnt a natural.

Because it doesn't come naturally to him to stop the ball, change direction, and kick it towards goal.


I can see him stop and think. Think about what he would do if the ball gets passed to him (you have to remember that as his mother, I only have eyes for him and barely look at the other 13 players on the pitch;)). And while he's thinking what to do, someone else gets the ball.

He plays midfield, and even when he gets in the box, I can see him look around and figure out where the goal is, should the ball get at his feet....

I've compared him to other players...(so I do look at the others, but only to compare him lol)...for some of them, the ball just arrives at their feet and they're gone..they know what to do with it, where to go or who to pass it to. It seems to come naturally to some of them, they just know what to do with the ball when they get it (not all of them, but at least 2 lads off his team).

For my lad, he's always trying to keep ahead of the game..always wondering what he'll do if he gets the ball...the other lads just KNOW what to do with it, instinctively.

He's improved 100% even since before christmas...even his coach has told me that he's improved dramatically, so that's all good. But it's still not his natural ability.

I can compare it to him dancing. He's as good as yer man from Diversity...he could do the moonlwalk since he was 3....so he'll dance around the living room to MJ Dance on the Wii and score 'perfect' everytime.....but wouldn't entertain going to a dance 'class'....coz that's just SO not cool; Even though it comes naturally to him.

dreamers75

Fittle wrote: »

Because it doesn't come naturally to him to stop the ball, change direction, and kick it towards goal.

Get a ball, place kid in front of a wall. An hour and day and it will work itself out. You dont just instantly be able to control a football. Touch and technique are easy to coach, thousands of drills for that even ones you can do at home.

Im guessing he hasnt played under 7 or been in a nursery? All those kids who can control probably have. Some kids display a touch and ability to run the length of a 7 aside pitch and crack one in and people think they are naturals. They normally vanish on an 11 a side pitch or become left backs. They are not naturals they are just good at running with a ball.

KeithAFC

SOCCER4LIFE wrote: »

No, they were thought very well at a very early age, and practised for hours and hours a day.

Again, it's like anything. The best guitar players in the world started at an early age, were thought well and practised for hours and hours every day.

Thats not true at all. You could train for hours and hours to be like Zidane. NEVER going to happen. I think you either just have it or you don't. Lampard has managed to make a very good career for himself but he just does not have the talent Iniesta has. He just doesn't have IT.

dreamers75

KeithAFC wrote: »

He just doesn't have IT.

Think both had IT if they became professional footballers. Your IT is the amazing ability to do something that even the opposition applauds, big difference in relation to the OP.

Fittle

dreamers75 wrote: »

Get a ball, place kid in front of a wall. An hour and day and it will work itself out. You dont just instantly be able to control a football. Touch and technique are easy to coach, thousands of drills for that even ones you can do at home.

Im guessing he hasnt played under 7 or been in a nursery? All those kids who can control probably have. Some kids display a touch and ability to run the length of a 7 aside pitch and crack one in and people think they are naturals. They normally vanish on an 11 a side pitch or become left backs. They are not naturals they are just good at running with a ball.

He does that every day. And no, he's never played under 7 or been in a nursery...I'm sure he'll get there;)

dreamers75

So after 6 months he doesnt have "it" ? wow...just wow.... :pac:

Ush1

I'm reading Messi's book at the mo and he was instantly good at football. He first started playing at 3 and was very good according to his father Jorge. It was actually his grandmother who always encouraged him and took him to training, which is quite a common thing in Argentina. Football is huge with women.

At four years old he was already playing with the local Grandoli team and was quickly playing against boys older than him.

I think they are born...

Fittle

dreamers75 wrote: »

So after 6 months he doesnt have "it" ? wow...just wow.... :pac:

There's no need for the sarcasm:rolleyes:

I've said time and time again, that this isn't about my own child having 'it' - it's a question asking if natural footballers are born or can they be made.

Cianan2

If he spends long enough during a week, it should come to him. Maybe encouraging him to do dancing classes to help with his football, in some way that might help with regards to finesse and flair sides of his game...

It also could do with the team, do they train or just play matches every week? Maybe the coach is just one of those guys who goes through the motions and then has them play a match between each other - if this is the case, maybe find a better club somewhere else in the area?

Fittle

Cianan2 wrote: »

If he spends long enough during a week, it should come to him. Maybe encouraging him to do dancing classes to help with his football, in some way that might help with regards to finesse and flair sides of his game...

It also could do with the team, do they train or just play matches every week? Maybe the coach is just one of those guys who goes through the motions and then has them play a match between each other - if this is the case, maybe find a better club somewhere else in the area?

thanks Cianan2.

I mentioned earlier that I'm not overly impressed with the team set-up - it tends to be a different dad coaching them each week...don't think any of them have any coaching 'skills' persay...they do about 10 minutes of 'training', then it's a match for the rest of the hour (twice a week). However, he LOVES his team. I mentioned it to him a while ago that we might look around for another team (I know there are at least 3 teams locally with much better structure going on - not sure that I could make their training times though) and there was no way he wants to leave the team he's currently on. He was almost in tears that I even mentioned taking him off the team - even though they have yet to win a match since last September:(

Mars Bar

Fittle wrote: »

thanks Cianan2.

I mentioned earlier that I'm not overly impressed with the team set-up - it tends to be a different dad coaching them each week...don't think any of them have any coaching 'skills' persay...they do about 10 minutes of 'training', then it's a match for the rest of the hour (twice a week). However, he LOVES his team. I mentioned it to him a while ago that we might look around for another team (I know there are at least 3 teams locally with much better structure going on - not sure that I could make their training times though) and there was no way he wants to leave the team he's currently on. He was almost in tears that I even mentioned taking him off the team - even though they have yet to win a match since last September:(

I think you'd be silly to take him away from that team.

It's obvious he's enjoying it and why would you take him away from his friends just coz you want him to improve or to win a match?

Is losing bothering him? If it's not, then leave him where he is.

Fittle

mars bar wrote: »

I think you'd be silly to take him away from that team.

It's obvious he's enjoying it and why would you take him away from his friends just coz you want him to improve or to win a match?

Is losing bothering him? If it's not, then leave him where he is.

Yes, the losing bothers him big-time! But I get what you're saying...I'll stick with this team for now.

Bottom line is of course I want him to improve - isn't that the case with every sport a kid takes up? Nobody starts playing tennis/hurling/athletics without the intention of improving at the sport.

He's not yet at the stage where getting beaten 12-0 regularly, makes him want to leave the team, but I've no doubt the 'fun' will be knocked out of it for him if losing week after week is the norm.

smackbunnybaby

I could have made it in football, singing, acting, you name it.
But decided to become a Business Analyst....

But enough about me.

Let him play whatever he wants and eventually he will settle on what he is good at ANDenjoys.

Sports lose a lot of children around the 12-13 age group anyway as they discover other sports/hobbies and can only do one thing.

event

stumpypeeps wrote: »

I'll give you the two most obvious examples i can think of. Tiger woods and Michael Schumacher. Both the greatest of their generation in their respective sports.

Neither of whom had parents with a history of success in their sports.

Both started at 2/3 years of age. Both of whom's parents made huge sacrifices to help their son achive success.

I have always believed that its more nurture than nature. Bounce just gave my beliefs a solid scientific basis.

but look at other sports stars

michael phelps didnt start swimming until he was 7
lance armstrong didnt start cycling until he was 12
Muhammad Ali didnt step into a ring until he was 12

yes, they all got coached but they werent nurtured from a young age.

you canot say with a level of certainty that it cant be from nature. they all were born with certain physical attributes that helped them become the best, that gave them a leg up in their sports. no amount of training can make that up

also, for people saying there is no such thing as natural talent, explain Robin Friday to me.