Positional Play Training Series: Introduction
Rondos and Positional Games are problematic.
They are not realistic enough.
They lack direction. They are too easy with the given numerical superiority. They don’t provide enough of the game.
We have all heard these statements made about this type of training methodology. But is it possible that at this point in the evolution of football, by way of training methodology globalization, Rondos and Positional Games have been made into a caricature? Have they become some fantastical beast that lives in the mountains of some obscure Spanish village? Has this training tool become so popular it’s become the objective in itself?
This is tiresome and I want to end the madness once and for all. I want to strip down Positional Play Training Methodology to show the logic, reason, and purpose behind this type of training. I want to show how Rondos and Positional Games do not have to be binary. I want to show that you do not have to hold your hand over the fire and choose whether you are either for or against.
Dichotomies Kills Nuance
When we create dichotomies that force us to choose between two opposing camps then we fail to see the value in either. We make it about ‘right or wrong’ instead of ‘right for a desired intention’. In doing so, we lose all of the beautiful complexities that come with learning.
In the case of Rondos and Positional Games, the dichotomous nature of this debate stops us from ever looking deepers into the ‘when’, ‘where’, ‘how’ and, probably the most important, ‘why’.
I want this to end.
I want to show all the grey in the middle.
I want to explore the nuance of this training methodology, which obviously includes the benefits and drawbacks. I want to dig deeper about how to intentionally use this type of training methodology to achieve certain results.
With each addition to this series, we’ll explore a different type of Rondo or Positional Game. As we add more and more, we’ll fill in the whole spectrum between where we are now, are they right or wrong?
The best place to start is with what we know.
Rondos and Positional Games are training activities that standardize the position of players within the game. What this means is the activity may limit the range of movement in the area of the game with the purpose of being able to direct more attention towards other variables of the game, like the timing or speed of individual or collective actions.
THE STANDARDIZATION OF POSITIONS
Consider a simple example: 4v2 Rondo
The players' positions are standardized. The four attacking players are limited to one side of a square, while the two defenders are inside the square trying to recover the ball. The standardization of the attacker’s positions means that they are able to direct their conscious attention to other elements of their play that will dictate success within the exercise, like the positioning of their body, the defenders’ movements, or their execution efficacy when interacting with the ball (eg. pass or reception).
Most Rondos or Positional Games standardize some positional element to facilitate the learning/development process. Additionally, the standardization of players’ positioning is a tool to unconsciously condition the player to position themselves ‘appropriately’ in relation to the game.
I use the word ‘appropriately’ with hesitation because as you will see, this entirely depends on the intention and context within the game.
INTENTIONALITY
Now that we have clarified what a Rondo or Positional Game is we can move on to some nuances of this type of training tool.
Everything always starts with Intention.
We should always remember that these Rondos and Positional Games are tools used to facilitate the understanding of the game. However, it doesn’t stop at simply understanding the game, Rondos and Positional Games should also be tools that help the player develop their ability to play the game better.
Simply put, training should make the player play football better.
When we see that Rondos and Positional Games are tools in order to help players better play the game, we can move away from a fundamentalist point of view.
Fundamentalists approach activities with a strict and literal interpretation. This means a fundamentalist might view training as one and only ‘correct’ approach, and one that has to be followed to the letter. This can be seen with those applying Rondos and Positional Games as well as those who are strictly opposed to Rondos and Positional Games.
Instead, we should strive for a Realist approach which applies this training tool when and where it’s needed bearing in mind the objective of training; improving the player’s ability to play the game.
When we take this ‘realist’ approach we accept the game as it is and we are prepared to deal with it accordingly. Which means we train the game accordingly, potentially using Rondos and Positional Games.
If the Fundamentalist approaches Rondos and Positional Games ‘in a strict and literal interpretation’, then the Realist is able to adapt Rondos and Positional Games to better serve the purpose of training. The way that this is done is by viewing this training tool as a framework. This means that it’s not the end point, rather it’s the starting point.
RONDOS AND POSITIONAL GAMES ARE FOOTBALL’S FRAMEWORK
Consider Rondos and Positional Games as the skeleton of a training activity. Just like a skeleton provides a structure for the body to build upon and supports the muscles and organs, Rondos and Positional Games can provide a structure for a training activity to build upon and support the various components and intentions of the training activity.
Any Rondo and Positional Game can be adapted to better suit a function, a purpose. By adapting the Rondo or Positional Game you can tailor it to be more specific. This is where the artist becomes Van Gogh. Guardiola talks about the importance of play in the sport not only for players but also for coaches. Coaches play in how they design the environment to better serve a purpose. This is where coaches can be imaginative. This is where I have the most fun.
Along with the imagination, coaches must have logical reasoning. The game is created by a series of constraints called the laws of the game. These laws condition the players’ behavior when participating in the game. Those that criticize Rondos and Positional Games often say that the game is directional and this type of training activity lacks that directional realism. They have used logical reasoning to come to this valid conclusion. They have pointed out a constraint of the game that a Rondo or Positional Game is leaving out, but have they stopped to think whether leaving out this element can provide an added benefit?
I could make the same point about the Rondo and Positional Game Fundamentalists. They would say that the game is about angles and shapes and through strict use of Rondos and Positional Games players have more exposure to using angles and shapes in their positioning which is good for player development.
Both knowing how to play to progress the ball and utilizing angles in positioning is valuable, therefore they are both correct.
What is happening here is with each training activity you are sacrificing something. Too many non-directional Rondos and Positional Games and players lack exposure to progressing and scoring goals. Too many training activities without positional standardization and players lack exposure to repetition of effective positioning.
You must now also consider one training activity a part of the training diet. Too much of one type of food and your body will lack the vitamins and nutrients necessary to function. Players must receive a balanced training diet. This is where you consider how training activities complement each other over the course of a week, a month, a season or a youth career.
MAKE THEM YOUR OWN
Rondos and Positional Games are brilliant when used as a framework. They are so malleable and adaptable to become all kinds of games. They are the skeleton to build a training diet around. You can adapt them so much over time that they become unrecognizable from when they started.
The beauty is how players interact within these types of activities. They become familiar with the structure, the skeleton of them, that as you build on them, players find familiarity in any variation of them. And more importantly, as you build them up closer and closer to the game, players will find familiarity in the match itself. And, like I started, the purpose of training is to help players play football better and to help them develop their skills and understanding of the game.
Rondos and Positional Games can be incredibly effective for developing a player's understanding and ability to play the game. The key is to understand the nuances of this type of training, and to use it in the right context and with the right intentions. By exploring the different types of Rondos and Positional Games and understanding the when, where, how, and why of using them, we can begin to see the value and complexity of this type of training methodology.
