Trials selection process

CdOtzi · Post by **CdOtzi** » Thu Oct 12, 2006 9:25 pm

Just interested to know. Some of our juniors sometimes go overseas to trial for junior teams in european leagues. How does the trialling process work over there?

CdOtzi · Post by **CdOtzi** » Wed Oct 25, 2006 8:10 pm

Reading commets over the forum, I tend to agree, if a player has been loyal to a club and been there for years he/she should not have to trial. Tell them their team for next season if they are still required at the club or tell them to continue their soccer somewhere else.

soccer mum · Post by **soccer mum** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:49 am

cdOtzi,

I take my hat off to you i tend to agree what a great idea it would save a lot of aggrivation.

Then kids could go and trial somwhere else and give it there all

Vagrant · Post by **Vagrant** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:19 am

So SoccerMum , you think a loyal club should not make a kid trial so he/she can trial better somewhere else - obviously you are not an administrator at a club - this is a very difficult time for clubs to finalise squads, and trialling at least shows a level of commitment.

Nova · Post by **Nova** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:37 am

End of the day it's still a breeding ground for future senior players!
Parents must realise this and the rejection part of trials is all part of growing up and learning to deal with it in the correct manner!
While clubs normally do stay loyal to existing players, they should not be obliged to pick these kids just on the basis of loyalty. It's of no benifet to the club and to the child if he's going to struggle through the season and he would be better off somewhere else where he can enjoy the game or even another sport they might be better at!
Like I've said before, it's more the parents that hurt than the child, but it's up to the parents to teach the kids that things don't get handed on a plate all the time, when you get knocked down get up again!

Barney Rubble · Post by **Barney Rubble** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 8:50 am

Nova, at wot age would u say the development towards the seniors should really begin ?

A 16 YO at first team would be exceptional to make it so 14 or 15 would seem realistic don't you think :?

Another point raised was about coaches / committee members sons (daughters?) being selected in teams because of parent involvement.

At a guess at junior level i would put it as at least 50%.

These parents should get a pat on the back for taking on the 'extra' duties of committee works. Lets be fair about this the coaches are usually harder on their kids than the others 'cause they know they can be

I would like to see coaches list the "availability" of parents to assist with things like running the line (PROPERLY) canteen, fetching balls from behind the goals at training. little jobs that keep things flowing.

Nova · Post by **Nova** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 9:58 am

Barney, I think at 14 you really start to see the real qualities of an up and coming player therefore serious developement should begin IMO! At 14 kids start to develope physicaly and mentaly enough to really start thinking about a high level commitment to the game, therefore the trial aspect is deadly serious!
The part you mentioned about club officials, well that's important too and yes their kids deserve to play to a certain extent BUT for the right reasons! Are they there for the love of the club or just to give their kids the best possible chance of "making it" ! It's a problem you'll find in every club in the land!
Some clubs have a's and b's which makes it easier to cater for but when you get these parents demanding A team only, well you have a problem and clubs with only one side would find it harder!
By the age of 14 the selection process has to weed this problem out and players picked on merit only and not because of other influences!

Barney Rubble · Post by **Barney Rubble** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 10:49 am

Thanks, i'll shout you a beer - if your old enough that is

Nova · Post by **Nova** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 10:57 am

Barney Rubble wrote:
Thanks, i'll shout you a beer - if your old enough that is

I'm the wrong side of 40, I'll have to ask mum

Antipasto · Post by **Antipasto** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 9:22 pm

some junior players trial like soccer champions, then when they get selected into the team, they seem to lose their abiltity. how can a player, who claims to be striker, trials like a champion striker, then when the season games start can't kick a goal.

Clubs should look at their players and assess their season on performance during the year and then let them know if they are required at the club next year. This gives the player a chance to trial some where else

Barney Rubble · Post by **Barney Rubble** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 10:56 pm

Fair call Antipasto but can you imagine the flack if a coach got to the end of the season and told players not to trial because i have seen you all year :?

2B honest their whole season has been a trial so why 'turn it on' at the end. I agree in your comment but you would need an elephant hide to pull it off . . . . .

that or some brass ones

CdOtzi · Post by **CdOtzi** » Sat Oct 28, 2006 4:53 pm

Trials should be for new players at a club. Clubs know the players that represent them at the junior level during a season and the weaknesses that exist in a side. If there is a weakness in defence then the trials should find a player to rectify this weakness. One very successful Western Zone club made one change to an already successful junior side and ended up winning the championship and the cup, two years in a row.
Why change a successful combination.

Drusetta · Post by **Drusetta** » Sun Oct 29, 2006 12:57 pm

cdotzi
Trialling only the new players works effectively ONLY IF the coach has not changed. I think you're forgetting that a new coach will not know the players. In addition new coaches wish to assess the players for themselves rather than rely on the opinion of other coaches still at the club (however accurate that opinion may be). Also, a new coach may be able to get more out of an ordinary player who may have been dropped from the squad the following year (it could simply be a clash of personalities).
If a significant quantity of players do not return or are promoted to higher age groups the coach may almost have to start from scratch anyway.
Lest we mention that from one season to the next the team could be lucky and get a quality coach or unlucky and get a bad coach.
However, I do take your point. When I have coached the same group of players in the following season, whilst all players will trial I spend 80% of my time watching the newcomers and only 20% watching the players from last season.

CdOtzi · Post by **CdOtzi** » Sun Oct 29, 2006 2:24 pm

When I refer to the Club knowing players, I mean the selection committee which would have the final say as to who will or will not be included in the squad. The new or existing coach would be briefed as to what the side needs(striker,defender,midfielder) to become better. If the coach does have the power to select his whole team then yes, all players must trial,(coloured bibs with numbers), but it would be unrealistic because there would be club influences driving the selection process.That would be for all clubs,in all the leagues.

soccer mum · Post by **soccer mum** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 1:38 pm

Vagrant wrote:So SoccerMum , you think a loyal club should not make a kid trial so he/she can trial better somewhere else - obviously you are not an administrator at a club - this is a very difficult time for clubs to finalise squads, and trialling at least shows a level of commitment.

Vagrant

I think you miss understood what i was trying to say

My point is most kids would rather stay at the club they are already with and not have to trial else where.

I never said they shouldn't trial at there own club

What i was getting at is if a coach is looking at replacing a player then it would be nice if they could let the child know so he or she can go and trial else where and make sure they give 100% and not put all there hopes and dreams into one club and then be dissapointed if they were to get dropped.

I do understand it is a very hard time for all concerned including coaches

Vagrant · Post by **Vagrant** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 4:16 pm

You are right Soccer Mum - the sooner you know the better it is for all concerned.

Unfortunately the timing is difficult for both players/parents and coaches/clubs.

Football Freak · Post by **Football Freak** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 5:17 pm

I see your point soccer mum,

My son trialled at a Northern club and he told me that when the coach saw the numbers at the trials he was honest enough to say that all players should keep their options open, he even advised of other clubs that were still doing trials just so no players miss out, I s'pose the players he was going to keep may of already been spoken too which is fair enough.

Givemetheball · Post by **Givemetheball** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 12:00 am

agree with all here, that's a first. Coaches can change year to year but some go on with the same team for 4 or more years. Depends on club policy (or lack of it). Then a team can be radically changed if a new coach arrives. Therefore even if the coach doesn't know his head from his ass when it comes to selections, he should still let the kids know sooner than later if he doesn't want them in his plans.
Coaches see differently to parents, so decisions on cutting players may not be viewed as sensible to some parents but as long as they r told early enough then they have the opportunity to trial elsewhere. They should be thinking of the kids and not string them along.

Dru, why look at existing players for only 20% of the time, is that because they will be in your final squad or you just interested in seeing which newbee will fit in? Sorta doesn't seem fair to just give 20% of attention to existing players if it's an open trial, 'cause they might miss out if your attention's elsewhere. just curious.

soccer mum · Post by **soccer mum** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:09 am

[quote Givemetheball
Dru, why look at existing players for only 20% of the time, is that because they will be in your final squad or you just interested in seeing which newbee will fit in? Sorta doesn't seem fair to just give 20% of attention to existing players if it's an open trial, 'cause they might miss out if your attention's elsewhere. just curious.[/quote]

I can see where Dru is coming from maybe he is happy with his team but might need a little improvement so only needs to watch the new kids as he would already have a good idea on the players he already has.

In my experience so far it seems to be coaches may only make a few changes for the new season so the team is not disrupted to much.

Football Freak · Post by **Football Freak** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:31 am

Well then it looks like this interseting topic has come to an amicable close then.

At least we all agree that it is important to keep our children interested in the worlds greatest game and not FIFA 07

(BTW- my lad whoops me every time we play, maybe i should look for some adult coaching on the Playstation

)

Drusetta · Post by **Drusetta** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:05 pm

The 20% was only a guide. It does not mean by any stretch of the imagination that the current squad members are already inclusions.
The 20% was intended to say that a current coach should know what the members of his/her current squad is capable of. Therefore to even up the comparison, the coach should spend more time (please don't quote me on the %'s) on the players he/she doesn't know. The current squad have had the entire season to "trial" so I'd say it is hardly unfair to them.
I tend to agree with the notion that a club will select a player of equal or slightly less ability than a newcomer based on club loyalty.

Vagrant · Post by **Vagrant** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:49 pm

[quote="Givemetheball"]agree with all here, that's a first. quote]

Thats because we are able to listen and appreciate others' views - possibly a sign of maturity!

Definitely some interesting points here - never too late to learn

Karicako · Post by **Karicako** » Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:57 pm

Hey Drusetta,

It's a shame that you actually had to come out & clarify your "20%" quote.

I'm a Coach too and I fully understood what you meant. Surely no parent/club/committee, etc. would actually hold you to every letter of the previous quote

And I couldn't agree with more with your comments. Ideally, every other person would have understood too.

CdOtzi · Post by **CdOtzi** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 9:29 pm

I've said my bit about players not having to trial,
but lets face it,
the real truth
is that it does give an opportunity for clubs
to get rid of personalities
not wanted around the club.

Tell me a club where it has'nt happened.

CdOtzi · Post by **CdOtzi** » Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:01 pm

Looking at recent forum posts there seem to be a number of very respectable clubs advertising for players. What happened at the trial selection process? Was the selection too restrictive that some clubs have found themselves short. (ABE, Modbury, Campbelltown ,AC,Birkalla, AH, Enfield)
:?

Antipasto · Post by **Antipasto** » Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:11 pm

CdOtzi wrote:Looking at recent forum posts there seem to be a number of very respectable clubs advertising for players. What happened at the trial selection process? Was the selection too restrictive that some clubs have found themselves short. (ABE, Modbury, Campbelltown ,AC,Birkalla, AH, Enfield)
:?

I agree alot of clubs are looking for players.

When a player does decide to quit after being selected through the trials process. How does a club fill the position, if the club can't fill the position does the club have a pre season trial?