A comparison of non-linear and linear approaches in developing goal scoring skills in elite youth football

Overall aim of this study was to investigate how to efficiently improve skilfulness in goal scor-ing in elite youth football. More specifically, an intervention was conducted to investigate whether non-linear pedagogy (NLP) or linear pedagogy (LP) is more efficient in improving goal scoring skill related actions. Suggested by prior research, more interventions should be conducted using representative test designs that are more closely aligned with the context of a football game environment (Bergmann et al., 2021; Roberts et al., 2020). The representativeness in this study was achieved by creating testing players under game-like physical loads, in a dynamic pressured situation with a defender, and creating an environment where adaptability was required. Concurrently, the study investigated what observable actions were connected in increasing skilfulness in goal scoring in terms of goal scoring percentage. A total of 18 elite-level football players from the highest national-level league for the age group were recruited for this study. The players were divided in to one of three groups: non-linear, linear, and control. The efficacy of the different pedagogical approaches was assessed by con-ducting a comparative pre-post-test intervention design. NLP, as a pedagogical approach, em-phasizes the exploration of individual movement patterns (Chow et al., 2021). In contrast, LP, as a pedagogical approach, is focused on developing practices that aim learning a predetermined movement pattern (Schöllhorn et al. 2006). The control group didn’t participate in specific goal scoring practices. Player’s goal-scoring abilities were measured both before and after a nine-week intervention training phase. An observational framework was developed to serve as a reliable tool for observing player actions during the skill test. The framework was constructed based on existing literature and expert interviews. Goal scoring actions were observed in four categories: finding space, ball control, shot accuracy, and strategic variability. The results indicate that there is no significant difference (95% CI, p > 0.05) between the peda-gogical approaches in improving players' goal-scoring skill-related actions. It appears that the development of goal-scoring skills in the short term is not hindered or enhanced by the chosen pedagogical approach. The findings are consistent with those of prior research (Roberts et al., 2020; Gaspar et al., 2019), suggesting that the current testing protocols used to assess football goal-scoring skills may be inadequate for identifying development. A more critical standpoint might beneficial when testing skilfulness in football. Furthermore, none of the observed actions were identified as crucial for increasing or decreasing the goal-scoring percentage. Despite theoretical distinctions, both methodologies showed comparable outcomes, indicating that the choice of pedagogical strategy may not crucially influence goal-scoring skill development in the short term. To elicit noticeable development, U17 elite level players may require more training with increased practice variability and long-term observation to truly grasp the directionality of their development. This study highlights the importance of considering the ways skilfulness in football can be reliably tested.