
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


“Playing up” is one of the most common—and often unquestioned—development decisions in youth sport.
In this episode, I break down a recent study examining how academy football coaches actually make those decisions. Rather than measuring outcomes, this research focuses on coach perception—what they look for, how they justify it, and where things can go wrong.
We explore how factors like biological maturation, social environment, and communication shape the playing-up process, and why it may not be the development advantage it’s often assumed to be.
Playing-Up
A younger athlete competing in an older age group to increase challenge.
Relative Age Effect (RAE)
Bias toward athletes born earlier in the selection year.
Relative Growth Effect (RGE)
Advantage based on biological maturation rather than chronological age.
Challenge Point Theory
Optimal learning occurs when task difficulty slightly exceeds current ability.
Playing up is not inherently beneficial—it is highly context-dependent.
Coaches often rely on subjective evaluation, which can be influenced by early maturation.
Social environment—especially parents and peer group—plays a major role in outcomes.
If an athlete is not meaningfully involved (touches, decisions, reps), development may decrease.
Playing up may redistribute opportunity, rather than create new development.
Evaluate athletes across:
Technical
Tactical
Physical
Psychosocial domains
Ensure:
The athlete can stay involved in play
The physical mismatch is manageable
Communication with player and parents is clear
Consider blended approaches:
Majority reps at appropriate level
Strategic exposure to higher levels
Small sample size (10 coaches)
UK academy system only
Based on coach perception, not performance outcomes
Findings are not universally generalizable
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CoretexGoaltending
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/coretexathletics
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/coretexathleticreview
Email: [email protected]
By Evan Kurylo“Playing up” is one of the most common—and often unquestioned—development decisions in youth sport.
In this episode, I break down a recent study examining how academy football coaches actually make those decisions. Rather than measuring outcomes, this research focuses on coach perception—what they look for, how they justify it, and where things can go wrong.
We explore how factors like biological maturation, social environment, and communication shape the playing-up process, and why it may not be the development advantage it’s often assumed to be.
Playing-Up
A younger athlete competing in an older age group to increase challenge.
Relative Age Effect (RAE)
Bias toward athletes born earlier in the selection year.
Relative Growth Effect (RGE)
Advantage based on biological maturation rather than chronological age.
Challenge Point Theory
Optimal learning occurs when task difficulty slightly exceeds current ability.
Playing up is not inherently beneficial—it is highly context-dependent.
Coaches often rely on subjective evaluation, which can be influenced by early maturation.
Social environment—especially parents and peer group—plays a major role in outcomes.
If an athlete is not meaningfully involved (touches, decisions, reps), development may decrease.
Playing up may redistribute opportunity, rather than create new development.
Evaluate athletes across:
Technical
Tactical
Physical
Psychosocial domains
Ensure:
The athlete can stay involved in play
The physical mismatch is manageable
Communication with player and parents is clear
Consider blended approaches:
Majority reps at appropriate level
Strategic exposure to higher levels
Small sample size (10 coaches)
UK academy system only
Based on coach perception, not performance outcomes
Findings are not universally generalizable
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CoretexGoaltending
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/coretexathletics
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/coretexathleticreview
Email: [email protected]