Recently, I’ve developed a passion for books about football (soccer). Among the various magazines and publications I’ve read, one book delivered quite an impact: What is Football?.
The title itself—What is Football?—is such a straightforward and essential question. Only someone deeply devoted to the sport would title a book this way, let alone write it. This has inspired me to one day write a book titled “What is Volleyball?” As I muse on this, I immediately bought the book.
The book’s two major themes are Tactical Periodization and Structuralism. The latter concept, in particular, provided profound inspiration. In this article, I want to explore and delve deeply into this idea of Structuralism.
What is Structuralism?
To establish a clear image of the concept, let’s turn to Wikipedia for a definition of Structuralism. While the abstract explanation may be challenging, I’ll bold the parts that are helpful for grasping the core idea:
(Excerpt) In principle, structuralism critiques element reductionism and pursues a relational understanding of structure. As Saussure is understood to have said that language only contains differences, a structure is determined simultaneously and interdependently only when one element is in relation to all other elements. In this understanding of structure, the elements that constitute the structure do not possess independence apart from the structure itself.
(Excerpt from Wikipedia: Structuralism)
If this abstract explanation is confusing, I recommend first understanding Element Reductionism (or Reductionism). Structuralism is perhaps easiest to grasp when viewed as the opposite concept.
The Structuralist Approach in Team Sports
Now, let’s specifically examine what the structuralist approach means in the context of team sports, as presented in the book.
The book uses football as a concrete example. I want to introduce Paco Seirul·lo, the figure who introduced this concept to team sports. Simply put, Seirul·lo:
- Originally specialized in track and field.
- Was unexpectedly tasked with youth development for the football section of FC Barcelona (one of the world’s most successful sports clubs and development academies).
- Is one of the foundational figures who created the basis of FC Barcelona’s renowned youth development system.
This background should certainly pique the interest of any Volleyball Coaching professional.
The structuralist approach Seirul·lo introduced is called Structured Training.
The motivation for developing this theory was his shock that the training methods for his specialty, the individual sport of track and field, were largely identical to those for the team sport of football. This single observation was the spark that ignited the systematization of Structured Training theory—a truly romantic beginning.
Emphasizing “Interrelation” and “Interaction”
In systematizing his Structured Training theory, Seirul·lo placed the highest value on interrelation and interaction.
This aligns with the concept in the Wikipedia definition of Structuralism: “one element is determined interdependently only when in relation to all other elements.”
With this clear concept of interrelation and interaction as the foundation, he outlined five primary objectives for training:
- Load Control in preparation for matches.
- Condition Maintenance throughout the season.
- Efficient Performance Improvement in limited time.
- Engaging Players with a variety of drills/menus.
- Simulating the Match in match-like situations.
From a coach’s perspective, these five objectives serve as an excellent “five-point guide” when planning any Volleyball Training or Long-Term Development curriculum.
The Player Structured by 8 Elements
What makes Seirul·lo’s Structured Training theory unique and noteworthy is its focus on the internal structure of the individual player.
As mentioned, Seirul·lo emphasizes the interrelation and interaction between the player and their surrounding environment (which includes teammates, opponents, weather, court, ball, referees—literally everything). He views this entire ecosystem as an extraordinarily complex overall structure—a Complex System.
Furthermore, through diverse academic approaches, he sought to structurally understand the individual player themselves, ultimately defining the player’s self-structure as being composed of 8 mutually interdependent elements:
- Biological Energy (Physical/physiological)
- Condition (Physical fitness)
- Coordination (Sport-specific essential techniques and body control)
- Cognitive ability (Information gathering, processing, understanding, and decision-making)
- Social ability (Communication skills)
- Emotional-Volitional state (Willpower, motivation)
- Expressive ability (Self-expression/promotion within the team)
- Mental capacity (Ability to integrate one’s existing capacities)
You might be thinking: Isn’t decomposing the player into 8 elements just a form of Element Reductionism?
It’s true that this factorization can lead to immediately treating each element in isolation.
However, remember the concept of Structuralism: the 8 elements are constantly in interrelation and interaction. The breakdown is merely part of the verbalization process. In reality, they must be understood as a structure that is constantly interrelating and interacting. Seirul·lo believed that the player’s self is structured by the dynamic interplay of these 8 elements.
Conceptualizing Structuralism in Team Sports in Two Stages
To effectively grasp the structuralist approach in team sports, it is helpful to conceptualize it in two stages:
- Optimizing the relationship between the player and the surrounding environment: The approach seeks to structure the relationships with the external world.
- Optimizing and integrating the 8 internal elements of the player: The approach seeks to structure the self.
Viewing the structuralist approach through these two stages allows for a clearer understanding of its application in Youth Development and System Tactics.
The Sport-Specific Nature of Condition, Coordination, and Cognition
Let’s further explore the process of self-structuring.
The book highlights three elements as being particularly important among the 8: Condition, Coordination, and Cognition.
Why are these three emphasized?
I believe it’s because these three elements are the most heavily influenced by the specific nature of that sport. Let’s compare football and volleyball.
Condition
Condition is further subdivided into Strength, Endurance, Speed, Flexibility, and Relaxation. Let’s use Speed as an example.
- Football: Speed is required for situations like quickly evading an opponent’s defense on a large pitch and dribbling without being caught.
- Volleyball: Speed is required for rapidly moving to the landing spot of a ball flying from the opponent’s court (receiving), and for a speedy step-approach to attack a ball in the confined 9m x 9m space.
The concept of “Speed” in football is entirely different from the “Speed” required in volleyball.
Coordination
- Football: Examples of coordination include dribbling with the feet and shooting.
- Volleyball: Examples include underhand passing, overhead passing, setting, and spiking.
It goes without saying that the coordination required for football is entirely different from that required for volleyball.
Cognition
- Football: Playing requires recognizing the entire vast pitch, the movements of 22 players dynamically flowing between offense and defense, and the ball’s movement.
- Volleyball: Playing requires recognizing the entire court (18m x 9m, including the opponent’s side), the continuous, subtle movements of the 6 players across the net, the 6 players on one’s own side, and the high-speed movement of the ball over a short duration.
Clearly, the Cognitive demands of football are also fundamentally different from those of volleyball.
As these concrete examples show, the three elements—Condition, Coordination, and Cognition—are where the specific nature of the sport is most intensely reflected. In planning Structured Training, it is crucial to keep these three elements at the center of your focus.
The Structuralist Approach in Volleyball Training
In this final section, let’s consider whether the structuralist approach is a valid tool for Volleyball, a prime example of a net-based team sport.
My current answer is Yes.
I believe it is highly effective for coaching, training planning, and curriculum development, especially in the youth categories (elementary through high school) that I am involved in and that are so vital to the future of Japanese volleyball.
My club (ONES) is currently engaged in various trials to construct a universal Volleyball Player Development Model. For me, this concept of the Structuralist Approach has been immensely impactful.
The world is flooded with various “theories” and “methods”—some commercial, others based on extensive research and authentic insights. It’s a mix of good and bad.
However, as coaches involved in human development, we have an obligation to continually learn. We must engage with and consider a vast array of information—both good and bad—and ultimately elevate it into our own philosophy.
I believe that continuously mixing and maturing various knowledge within my mind is one way to avoid falling into stagnation.
I will continue to learn and evolve.
