Build out line- best part of the new changes

timbuck

timbuck

Ive got an 07 daughter. And an 05.
After watching the 07 teams play with and without the build out line, I think this is the best thing that has been done for youth soccer in a long time. (Small sided games at older ages - I don't see this as a plus or a minus. Will help some kids. Might hurt others. Age group changes- sucked for a year, but seems that everyone has adjusted just fine).
This is forcing teams to play out of the back. To get their head up and look for options. The time they have to make decisions with the ball are going to help them as they get older. Havjng the big, strong kid pound goal kicks past midfield goes away. Your defensive players actually have to play soccer in the back.
And teams parking 3 kids at the top of the 18 to jump on a flubbed goal kick doesn't happen any more. Those players need to organize, press and mark now.
And the keeper punt (while great if you have a kid that can boot it) is gone. No more 50/50 ball from 20 feet in the air.

I'll be curious to see what happens in 10 years with these players. That will be the real determining factor of whether this is considered a success.
 
Totally disagree. The "no-punt" rule means that no team ever has to defend against a long ball. Very few players at the youngest ages - especially girls - can throw the ball more than about 15 yards in the air. So coaches just push their players up to the restriction line, have them track the keeper left and right, and then swarm the first player to get the ball. I would say that most goals I've seen under the new rule come as a result of a team's inability to get the ball out of the back when swarmed.

When keepers could punt, it forced the opposition to hold players in the back and midfield. Teams who worked on building out had a fair chance of doing it because opponents were more equally distributed over the entire field.

Who has benefits from the restriction line? Coaches who have fast, aggressive player who will swarm.

Who is punished? Coaches who have always trained kids to build-out, because their inability to punt means that they can no longer keep the opposition honest.
 
I like the rule also.

Teams with a goalie who could punt well could immediately get rid of pressure by kicking the ball 30-40 yards down field.

I think what you'll see some teams begin to do is the short pass and then the fullback will just boom it. But this still beats a 30-40 yard punt by the goalie in my book.

Also, I wish that tournaments would adopt the rule. At least make things consistent.
 
zebrafish said:
I like the rule also.



I think what you'll see some teams begin to do is the short pass and then the fullback will just boom it. But this still beats a 30-40 yard punt by the goalie in my book.

.
Click to expand...

For the future, the kids will need to learn how to punt and it's a skill that takes time since ideally most of them will be rotating through goal in the early years for the experience. While maybe not a critical skill for all players, it is a useful one to have. The fullback doesn't need to learn to just boom it...more kickball is the last thing that the U8 sport needs. If you are right and this is what happens, the rule change has created lousy incentives.
 
Daniel Miller said:
Totally disagree. The "no-punt" rule means that no team ever has to defend against a long ball. Very few players at the youngest ages - especially girls - can throw the ball more than about 15 yards in the air. So coaches just push their players up to the restriction line, have them track the keeper left and right, and then swarm the first player to get the ball. I would say that most goals I've seen under the new rule come as a result of a team's inability to get the ball out of the back when swarmed.

When keepers could punt, it forced the opposition to hold players in the back and midfield. Teams who worked on building out had a fair chance of doing it because opponents were more equally distributed over the entire field.

Who has benefits from the restriction line? Coaches who have fast, aggressive player who will swarm.

Who is punished? Coaches who have always trained kids to build-out, because their inability to punt means that they can no longer keep the opposition honest.
Click to expand...
I told my DD about the new ulittle build up line. She told me, that's dumb....the defenders won't know how to deal with high pressuring teams when that build up line is removed.

She has a point, it's easy to hold the ball without pressure and another story with forwards and mid-fielders pressing.
 
NoGoal said:
I told my DD about the new ulittle build up line. She told me, that's dumb....the defenders won't know how to deal with high pressuring teams when that build up line is removed.

She has a point, it's easy to hold the ball without pressure and another story with forwards and mid-fielders pressing.
Click to expand...

Trust me, the defenders are not holding the ball without pressure because of the build out line. The opposing team is coming after them as soon as they touch the ball. What it does give the defenders is a MOMENT to receive the ball and then try to find an open teammate.....to build out of the back.

That is the whole point of the build out line......trying to get players to become comfortable playing out of the back. Are the rules for it perfect? No. Will they continue to adjust things to make it better? Probably.

But the build out line is, IMO, a great step in the right direction for helping our younger players become comfortable playing out of the back.
 
BarcaLover said:
Trust me, the defenders are not holding the ball without pressure because of the build out line. The opposing team is coming after them as soon as they touch the ball. What it does give the defenders is a MOMENT to receive the ball and then try to find an open teammate.....to build out of the back.

That is the whole point of the build out line......trying to get players to become comfortable playing out of the back. Are the rules for it perfect? No. Will they continue to adjust things to make it better? Probably.

But the build out line is, IMO, a great step in the right direction for helping our younger players become comfortable playing out of the back.
Click to expand...

Ballet practice.
 
BarcaLover said:
Trust me, the defenders are not holding the ball without pressure because of the build out line. The opposing team is coming after them as soon as they touch the ball. What it does give the defenders is a MOMENT to receive the ball and then try to find an open teammate.....to build out of the back.

That is the whole point of the build out line......trying to get players to become comfortable playing out of the back. Are the rules for it perfect? No. Will they continue to adjust things to make it better? Probably.

But the build out line is, IMO, a great step in the right direction for helping our younger players become comfortable playing out of the back.
Click to expand...
And can't the team with the ball pass back to a defender positioning themselves deep in the build out line and the pressing stops?
 
NoGoal said:
And can't the team with the ball pass back to a defender positioning themselves deep in the build out line and the pressing stops?
Click to expand...

In SCDSL this past season the rule was once the GKer rolled the ball or passed the ball out to a defender, as soon as the defender touched the ball the opposing team was free to enter inside the build out line and press.

I don't know how other gaming circuits are implementing the build out line.
 
BarcaLover said:
In SCDSL this past season the rule was once the GKer rolled the ball or passed the ball out to a defender, as soon as the defender touched the ball the opposing team was free to enter inside the build out line and press.

I don't know how other gaming circuits are implementing the build out line.
Click to expand...
How is that any different without a build out line, besides no punting?
 
NoGoal said:
How is that any different without a build out line, besides no punting?
Click to expand...

Well, if a team wants to try and build out of the back when the GKer has the ball and the opposing team is sitting on both CBs(inside the build out line) it makes it a suicide mission to do so.

The build out line provides a little time and space for a defender to receive a ball and then try and build their attack. The point of the build out line is development.....helping players to become comfortable playing out of the back.
 
Isn't the solution to go with a build up line but allow punting? This gives the team with possession the option of getting rid of it to relieve pressure, forces the other team to cover the back (rather than having all the players at a line of scrimmage ready to pounce on the poor defender), teaches the keepers how to punt and gives the defenders a second to think about the build up. Otherwise you are just transferring the problems of the gk to the defender who if being rushed by 3 others might just opt or be told to boot it particularly if they have a big leg and/or a not very development oriented coach.
 
I guess I look at the whole concept from a non traditionalist point of view. If the long ball works sometimes why not utilize it as a strategy. I know the "beautiful game" purist crowd hate that attitude. I understand that being able to maintain possession and build from the back is a good strategy, but so is having fast forwards and defenders with booming kicks. If we followed traditional attitudes, football would not have instituted the forward pass, basketball the 3 point shot, etc. Nobody says you cant build out of the back without the instituted line, many teams do it anyway. For me it is just "forced development opportunity" rather than reality. Maybe we could not allow strikers to shoot inside the 18...wouldn't that increase their longer shot accuracy or not allow a break away more than 10 yards to increase passing skills....
 
Grace T. said:
Isn't the solution to go with a build up line but allow punting?
Click to expand...
No, that would just encourage teams to punt as the easy way out. Build out line is great...especially for Ulittles development. Any respectable coach would agree with the fundamentals behind it. This is a step in the right direction to get away from ugly American kickball to closing the gap with more sophisticated soccer countries.
 
wildcat66 said:
If the long ball works sometimes why not utilize it as a strategy.
Click to expand...
The buildout line does not take away the opportunity for long balls. In fact, it will probably make long balls more effective as building out from the back/switching fields will draw the opposing team in and then long balls can be used to find space for the forwards to run into.
 
I have watched the boom ball vs possession debate over the years as a soccer dad and feel like if it is so detrimental to development of players why isn't it banned or rules put in place to make it not possible. For me it comes down to an attitude of tradition and culture over effectiveness. It is like telling a basket ball team, "Yeah you won, but you don't do free throws well" or a football team, "you guys score a lot but you should run the ball more." My observation has been that big, strong, aggressive and fast are not what "real" soccer players should be. They should be quick, agile, skillful etc. As an outside observer prefer to watch the big, strong, fast paced, more contact type of soccer than the calm, patient, flowing ballet that the traditionalist play.
 
Grace T. said:
Isn't the solution to go with a build up line but allow punting? This gives the team with possession the option of getting rid of it to relieve pressure, forces the other team to cover the back (rather than having all the players at a line of scrimmage ready to pounce on the poor defender), teaches the keepers how to punt and gives the defenders a second to think about the build up. Otherwise you are just transferring the problems of the gk to the defender who if being rushed by 3 others might just opt or be told to boot it particularly if they have a big leg and/or a not very development oriented coach.
Click to expand...

A "solution" would be to make it optional, either by team, by game, or by league.
 
wildcat66 said:
I have watched the boom ball vs possession debate over the years as a soccer dad and feel like if it is so detrimental to development of players why isn't it banned or rules put in place to make it not possible. For me it comes down to an attitude of tradition and culture over effectiveness. It is like telling a basket ball team, "Yeah you won, but you don't do free throws well" or a football team, "you guys score a lot but you should run the ball more." My observation has been that big, strong, aggressive and fast are not what "real" soccer players should be. They should be quick, agile, skillful etc. As an outside observer prefer to watch the big, strong, fast paced, more contact type of soccer than the calm, patient, flowing ballet that the traditionalist play.
Click to expand...

People say "boom ball vs possession" as if that is all there is.
 
rainbow_unicorn said:
No, that would just encourage teams to punt as the easy way out. Build out line is great...especially for Ulittles development. Any respectable coach would agree with the fundamentals behind it. This is a step in the right direction to get away from ugly American kickball to closing the gap with more sophisticated soccer countries.
Click to expand...
Punting is at best a 50 50 proposition for most goalies that age. That's v the easier throw to the defender behind the build up line. Think you'd see both particurly of the team is required to rotate keepers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top