Skills - are they born with them or they're made?

[Dry Rot]

So often I read "X is a skilful player" when that player pretty much was a damned skilful player from his earliest days eg Bob Murphy.

In contrast, say Lower looks like a player who gets in and gives 110% but is not really a skilful player, despite being in the system for a few years now.

So, can you really teach skills? (beyond round the edges)

[Hotdog60]

You can develop skills to a certain level and be very accomplished in your chosen sport but if the skill comes naturally then you can excel and become one of the greats.

So I would lean to being born with skills.

[bornadog]

Some players are naturally talented but don't train hard enough and just don't get to the elite level, whereas others with litlle natural skills, but with great determination and hard work will become a very good player. Eg Cross, Libba senior.

So l think you are born with skills but can also work hard at developing them.

[SonofScray]

I think game sense, from that perspective of being able to beat an opponent is reasonably innate. Across a few presentations, from your courageous players with manic attacks on the ball (a Smith type) to the more mercurial (Stevie J type) it always struck me that players either have "it" or they don't. Probably not skills tough, is it, more style of play.

Kicking, marking, handpassing, tackling etc are made, over a very long time.

[Dry Rot]

I think game sense, from that perspective of being able to beat an opponent is reasonably innate. Across a few presentations, from your courageous players with manic attacks on the ball (a Smith type) to the more mercurial (Stevie J type) it always struck me that players either have "it" or they don't.

Agreed.

And what about those rare players (across many sports) who just seem to have more time to do things than everyone else?

[Dry Rot]

Some players are naturally talented but don't train hard enough and just don't get to the elite level, whereas others with litlle natural skills, but with great determination and hard work will become a very good player. Eg Cross, Libba senior.

So l think you are born with skills but can also work hard at developing them.

True, but for all his many great qualities and courage, I wouldn't call Cross a skilful player.

[EasternWest]

So often I read "X is a skilful player" when that player pretty much was a damned skilful player from his earliest days eg Bob Murphy.

In contrast, say Lower looks like a player who gets in and gives 110% but is not really a skilful player, despite being in the system for a few years now.

So, can you really teach skills? (beyond round the edges)

I played basketball with a guy, lets call him Warren, who was a good player when I first met him, but he wasn't a great shooter. He had a sort of double pump shooting style that was a bit awkward. He was a smart player though an recognised that he wasn't a great shot so he didn't shoot often.

He was always pretty determined and competitive, and I remember coming back for preseason and his shooting style was incredible. Just perfect, and he became one of the better shooters I'd played with. He still didn't shoot as much as I would've liked, but he hit more than he missed when he did. I didn't want to use his real name because he may or may not read this forum and think I was brown nosing, but I'm really not. He was just a very good shot.

TL;DR I think skill is a natural thing, but with enough persistence and dedication, skills can be learned.

[Bulldog Joe]

I am of the view that skill can be learned but the real stars have an innate vision that allows them to see it unfold giving them time and poise to execute the skill.

Most of these really talented individuals have an ability across a range of sport.

I am sure plenty of us have grown up with the best batsman in the cricket team also being the best golfer.

In the same way the best shot on the basketball court was often the best kick on the footy field. When these talented individuals also embrace the hard work required, you produce champions.

[w3design]

I am of the view that skill can be learned but the real stars have an innate vision that allows them to see it unfold giving them time and poise to execute the skill.

Most of these really talented individuals have an ability across a range of sport.

I am sure plenty of us have grown up with the best batsman in the cricket team also being the best golfer.

In the same way the best shot on the basketball court was often the best kick on the footy field. When these talented individuals also embrace the hard work required, you produce champions.

You are right BJ, some of us are born with innate talents in specific fields. These guys start out talented, and will always remain so. In turn, they may or may not make the most of their God given gifts.

Others, less gifted, if they have the courage and determination can develop what skills they do have, to a useful level. They may never have an exquisite skill sets, however they may still become highly effective team members.

Physical skills CAN be taught, mental ones depend solely on the individual concerned.

That is what makes the difference between those who make it in any sport, and those who don't. I grew up knowing 2 kids with all but genius level natural talents, one as a muso, and one was a painter. While both made a successful life using those talents, neither ever reached their full potential, and I often wondered, was it a lack of drive that cost them. Did they expect that exceptional talent alone was all they needed, and that because of it, they did not need to work as hard as other perhaps less talented kids.

[stefoid]

True, but for all his many great qualities and courage, I wouldn't call Cross a skilful player.

He is skillful in the clinches. Winning the contested ball and disposing well in traffic is skill. He just cant kick on the run, and his stationary kicking is up and under, so that limits his effectiveness somewhat.

I reckon constant AFL practice gets you (puling a number out of the air) 50% better than your 'natural' skill, but natural skill is acquired when you are young, if you do a lot of kicking with the correct technique, on the run, when you are a child, you will end up a 'natural' kick.

Whereas someone like Smith could practice until doomsday and could only ever hope to become adequate. Thats OK, though, I think he is the type who could maintain adequate kicking skills even under pressure, whereas some natural kicks who look a million bucks in space go to water when pressured.

IMO is is just not worth drafting someone who cant demonstrate their skills under pressure. I would rather draft someone like Smith who remains adequate in any situation than someone who goes from elite to rubbish when pressure is applied.

[Mantis]

Anything to do with bio-mechanics can be taught.

Take golf for instance - I have seen blokes swing a golf club like an axe, but after a bunch of lessons and plenty of practice they can turn it around and swing it well.

While it helps to be naturally skilled, good coaching and plenty of practice will ensure any at-birth deficiencies can be rectified.

[stefoid]

I can't think of any AFL footballers that have come into the system that have gone from poor kicks to elite kicks during the course of their career.

[Bulldog Joe]

Anything to do with bio-mechanics can be taught.

Take golf for instance - I have seen blokes swing a golf club like an axe, but after a bunch of lessons and plenty of practice they can turn it around and swing it well.

While it helps to be naturally skilled, good coaching and plenty of practice will ensure any at-birth deficiencies can be rectified.

The real skill that is difficult to teach would be vision.

Some see it as hand to eye co-ordination but it is certainly something that identifies the gifted from the ordinary.

I totally lack it and as a consequence I am hopeless at cricket, tennis, golf or just about anything. At football I was a horrid kick and at basketball I was awful when it came to shooting.

I recall a game where I was playing on a guy who had represented Tassie and he suddenly headed in a different direction. While I was wondering why and trying to catch up he was taking a mark unopposed. He just knew where it was going and I was never able to do that.

The execution of of skills is definitely easier when that innate sense of the game is present.

[Ghost Dog]

Some people have the twitch fibres. Look at all the African Americans in Basketball.

[Bulldog Joe]

Some people have the twitch fibres. Look at all the African Americans in Basketball.

That is not really anything to do with skill. The twitch fibres are about speed and power.

[Ghost Dog]

And agility.

[Maddog37]

I can't think of any AFL footballers that have come into the system that have gone from poor kicks to elite kicks during the course of their career.

Stewie Loewe improved dramatically as did Joe Misiti. If you had lists you could pick those that improved but truly elite kicks are rare.

It does make you wonder why they did not get taught correctly earlier though especially as their footy ability would generally have been quite apparent.

[stefoid]

Kicking for goal is a bit different as you have all the time in the world to kick off a couple of steps. I can see how that could improve to a reasonable level for accuracy given technique training.

Being able to kick low and quick while on the run is such an uncommon skill that some blokes get drafted when they can do that and just about nothing else.

[Mofra]

Kicking for goal is a bit different as you have all the time in the world to kick off a couple of steps. I can see how that could improve to a reasonable level for accuracy given technique training.
For a lot of juniors, just training them to have a set technique/routine seems to help.

Then you have the rare opposites - guys who are good field kicks but get the yips in front of goal. One C. Grant was an example.

[jeemak]

Like a lot of areas of the game it's hard to determine if skill can be taught until a number of years are spent within the system.

The training and teaching that goes into the modern AFL player these days gets the best out of some, and not a lot out of others when it comes to skills, and many other areas of the game.

Some players in juniors are fantastic at executing skills under junior pressure, but they fail to transfer that to senior football under senior pressure. That's why technique is so important for a lot of draftees, because if they don't have any weaknesses repetitive training for the technically sound can result in a huge improvement in decision making and execution quite quickly, even if throughout junior football they weren't the pick of the bunch.

One of the biggest issues with the skills side of the game right now is the emphasis on recovery due to the strenuous athletic nature of it. Development staff are hamstrung throughout the season by the need to get players primed athletically for the next week's game. There's not a lot of time for repetitive skills training anymore.

[w3design]

There can be little doubt that Sir D Bradman was born with a natural gift for batting, and fantastic hand/eye co-ordination. But was it these gifts, or the thousands of hours he apparently put into honing those talents, that made him so much better than anyone else?

I doubt that these days very many players reach League level without having been blessed with some natural skill sets appropriate to our game. The difference between an ordinary and a good player at this level I think has more to do with application both physical and mental, than comparative talent levels.
For mine if these kids are good enough to get to this level in the first instance, the difference between those that turn out to be hacks, and those that forge really good sound careers. occurs mainly in the heart and mind, rather than their genes.