Coordination: a better lens to view technique through

When a player is about to step up and execute the action of a shot, there are generally a limited number of ways in which this shot can physically be executed to gain success.

This is not to say that there isn't variation, but rather the variation generally conforms to certain movement principles e.g. toe to strike under ball for it to go up etc.

To support players in their development of this shooting action, coaches will often assess the ‘technique’ of this individual, by aligning what they see the player do, to what they expect should happen for a successful attempt to emerge. The larger the gap between the two, often the further that player is perceived to be from being ‘technically effective’.

Technical success can therefore be considered a combination of quality of action, its efficiency and effectiveness aligned to a specific ‘technical model’.

These statements above are nothing new and provide most coaches with a suitable term to support their observations with.

However, ‘technique’ has also been coined to describe the mechanics of an action, and as a result another term, ‘skill’, is necessary to describe more contextualised behaviours in which ‘technique’ is applied within.

For example, it is not uncommon to hear ‘skill’ described as the ability to apply ‘technique’ in the right place, and right time within the greater chaos of a game.

Unintentionally, ‘technique’ can therefore be seen as the starting point, and ‘skill’ as the end point of learning an action.

Our challenge is, at what point does technique become skill? Is it simply when opposition are added to the practice environment, or as soon as we travel away from the bottom of the practice spectrum e.g. increased variability due to the effect of interference?

However, we think coaches can become better observers through the removal of these terms. Furthermore, we feel that coaches can also become better coaches, through the removal of these terms, by allowing themselves to zoom in further towards the environment the player is attempting football actions within.

The practice spectrum

This should then help support coaches to better ‘diagnose’ what the player needs, which will consequently affect our choice of practice design, hopefully for the better.

This is where we bring about the idea of coordination as a term to cover it all!

Coordination can be defined as the following:

The organization of the different elements of a complex body or activity so as to enable them to work.

This means in relation to sport; coordination is the resultant movement outcome in relation to interacting elements that the player already has or is having to contend with.

The ‘in relation to’ element is the key part to digest.

If we are practicing within the lower part of the practice spectrum, for example, unopposed work, a player may likely practice dribbling around stationary cones.

Therefore in this case the player is moving with a ball in relation to cones. Thus if a player gets better at dribbling around cones, this is because they are able to now relate and adapt their own movement to that of a ball, and the stationary cones.

Logically, if we then travel up the practice spectrum, the greater the chance there will be more information for the player to relate their movements to.

For example, we may have 10 players dribbling around cones that are randomly placed (over varying distances and angles) and with players moving with their ball in a random direction of travel. This can be considered an increase in interference. The players dribbling must now move with a ball in relation to cones and other moving bodies.

Therefore the further we go up the spectrum, the greater the information to relate towards, and herein lies our final thought.

If football is simply movement with or without a ball, in relation to something… we should be observing how they interact, not necessarily only how they act.

If we are better able to observe the information that a player is interacting with when performance breaks down or is successful, then we can get better at designing sessions to include, exclude or manipulate this relevant information.

If a player is able to sole role the ball around defenders within a game already, there would likely be no need to utilise practices within the lower end of the spectrum as they are already moving with the ball in relation to more game realistic information (such as defenders, the goal, the intensity of the opponent, score line etc) , that a lower spectrum practice may devoid the player of unnecessarily.

Therefore, primarily we would want to refine their action within the environment in which they are already competent in executing it within.

Alternatively, if a player is struggling to roll the ball with the sole of their foot as they lose their balance, then we may want to simply allow them to move with a ball in relation to the sole of the foot and ball only. As any other information may widen their focus too far, and the chaos they find themselves within may negatively effect their attempts.

We can then begin to scale up the practice to then include greater interference, variability and competition once the player experiences some successful trials with the optimal amount of information needed, always aligned to their current capabilities.

Additionally, using this term of coordination may also support us in recognising that we may never need to visit the lower end of the spectrum, but rather gradually reduce the complexity and amount of information for the player to relate to. This can be defined as working backwards.

Consequently, in this short piece, we put forward the idea that technique and skill are terms that, although considered effective, are not necessarily complete, and that coordination may be a better and more contextual term for coaches to use, providing a greater level of detail for the coach to engage with.

Have fun exploring!