Can You Recreate the Game in Practice?

The Only Question That Matters When You Plan a Training Session

I've spent years planning sessions, delivering model sessions for coaching licenses, and watching other coaches train their teams. And honestly, after all of that, I think everything comes down to one question.

Is it game-like?

Before you switch off — this isn't me telling you small-sided games are the only way, or that isolated technical work has no place in your sessions. That's not where I'm going. There's no absolute right or wrong way to run a training session. You know your players, you coach your way. But understanding what "game-like" actually means will make everything you do more effective, regardless of your approach.

So what does game-like actually mean?

The only truly game-like environment is 11v11. That's the game. Everything else — every drill, every small-sided game, every rondo — is a simulation. The question is how close to the real thing your simulation gets.

Think about what the actual game involves. There's direction — you're attacking a goal, you're in someone else's space trying to score, and they're trying to do the same to you. There's an opponent who's working against you. There are winners and losers. And there are rules — throw-ins, corners, goal kicks, fouls, offside. All of it.

But if you had to strip it down to one thing, I'd say the most important element is intensity.

I once lost a game 12-0 in a tournament. And I mean this when I say it — it was so quiet in the middle of that game you could literally hear cars starting in the parking lot. Zero intensity. Our opponent was just too strong, there was no chance of getting anything going, and the whole game became a non-event. That's about as far from game-like as you can get.

When I look at any training activity now, that's the lens I use. Is there intensity here? Is there something at stake? Does it feel like anything matters?

Why small-sided games work — and when they don't

Small-sided games work because you can get competition, direction, winners and losers, and real game moments all in one activity. A 4v4 to four goals, a 5v5 with target players — all of that builds towards intensity. And in play-practice-play sessions, the two playing phases give players real exposure to game situations, which translates directly to the weekend.

But here's the thing: small-sided games only deliver if you're managing them properly. The criticism — "they just play games, there's no coaching" — is sometimes valid. If your games don't have clearly identified winners and losers, if the teams aren't balanced, if there's no structure to the competition, then it does just become a playground kickaround. And the parents watching from the sideline would be right to question it.

Reward the winners. Don't punish the losers — losing is tough enough and you want them to care about the result naturally. But make it mean something. Who picks the pinnies? Who starts with the ball? Who gets to choose the next game? There are a hundred ways to make winning matter without making losing feel like punishment.

What about technical work?

If you're doing isolated skill work — everyone has a ball, working on a specific technique — how do you make that game-like?

Start with competition, even in individual work. Everyone has a ball, working on pullbacks — who can do the most in 30 seconds? Cheer them on, create a moment. That's not nothing. That's intensity in a different form.

But then ask yourself: how quickly can you get an opponent involved? Because here's the thing — a skill is only a skill if you can use it in the game. If you're working on pullbacks and the next activity is a face-up 2v2 where the ball is played in and you're looking at goal, a pullback is the worst thing you could do — you're going backwards toward your own net. The crowd would be going crazy. That's a disconnect between what you trained and what the game requires.

Think about the context before you pick the technique. Is this moment game-realistic? Would a player actually use this here? Because if what you practice in training has no logical home in the game, the translation won't happen. Players play how they practice, but only when what they practice looks like what they play.

The challenge

You get two, maybe three hours a week with your players. That's not much. My challenge to you is to make it as game-like as possible as quickly as possible in those sessions. That means competition from the first whistle. That means winners and losers that mean something. That means rules that mirror the real game.

And every time you're about to run something in training, just ask the one question: is it game-like?

Heads and Volleys Podcast, Episode 91

@LeeDunneSoccer