Where is your line drawn...?

The Moral Mankad Maze...

It was one of those things that occurs occasionally in the world of sport that I love observing from a variety of different perspectives. The way people share their views from polarised positions, taking into account a whole host of different stances is intriguing. 

The specific talking point I am referring to is the 'Mankad' dismissal in the U19 Cricket World Cup by Keemo Paul from the West Indies, in their important match against Zimbabwe. The winner qualified for the quarter final and the loser went out the competition. Here is a link to the actual moment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV3gXRZqx8g

The important thing to consider is the fact this dismissal is in the rules so there actually isn't really a debate. The batsmen does not have to be warned by the umpires beforehand, although that is often done in such times, as England's Jos Buttler found out previously. What it does raise is the question of ethics and sportsmanship. But where is the line drawn?

So I then equate this to my sport and considered the question - where does the line from black turn to white, through the grey part? And what am I prepared to sacrifice?

Would I be happy if England qualified for the football World Cup Final having scored the winner from a goal that came from a penalty where the player had clearly dived? What about if the goal came from a clear handball that lead to an advantage and a goal? What about if one of their players was injured and we hadn't kicked the ball out of the pitch? What about a terrible refereeing decision that missed a blatant offside but we scored?

This is the question for me - where do you draw the line? And also the part that creates the debate because everyone has a slightly different 'line' based upon their values and beliefs. 

The cricket example is from the U19 World Cup, and this is elite sport. It isn't a school match. So does that make it right? Where does the line change in terms of ages and competition? U18? U21? Never? Or is that a very British attitude to this? I'm not sure!

The rules haven't been broken, so do the rules need to be changed? Or is it a valuable learning experience for the batsmen? But what if they had gone for a quick single and he had slid in to make it and he made this by an inch? Does that make the head start he got then ok? Or has he cheated and gained an advantage?

We have some great discussions with coaches about the importance of 'tactical fouls' in the game of football. At what stage are these ok? Do we teach them (as this then raises the moral questions again)? If you picked U18 for example as your benchmark, if these aren't ever discussed and then a 17-year old gets picked for the First XI that weekend (i.e. Luke Shaw at Southampton previously) he would be expected to consider this course of action on a Saturday when three points are on the line, would he not? 

I can certainly recall playing football, not going up for an attacking corner as I was a little full-back. But when the opposition broke quickly on the counter attack I had a job to do. It was not unheard of that I would deliberately foul at the halfway line to stop them attacking quickly and allow our team to regroup defensively and get players back. Is that a 'tactical foul'? And is that ok?

However, whilst the debate will rage, at no stage is this acceptable in grassroots football. The game is bigger than the three points in that kid's match and as coaches we must set the appropriate behaviour and role model the characteristics we want our players to adhere to. This is a crucial role of the grassroots coach in any sport. 

But in elite sport...? The debate will continue and it's a fascinating maze of morality!

The next frontier: measuring the stuff that really matters

So I was having a trip round a Professional Sporting Academy, being given the behind-the-scenes tour by the Academy Manager. We walked through the indoor area into the next room to "where the sports scientists live" I was told. And that's what they do, in nearly every sport, sit behind their laptops where they can produce lots of data from all the testing they do. 

Now, I thoroughly understand right now there are going to be staff within that part of the sporting community that aren't going to be happy with that generalisation, this post and see this as a personal attack on their profession. This isn't about that so please don't take offence this early into the article! 

We continued on the wander round, chatting about the great work they do and the value they bring to player development. Interestingly, the view from the Academy Manager was also that there is a danger that some sport scientists are becoming a hinderance. I was told of one SS that tried to stop a 16-year old going out to practice later in the afternoon "based on data"! I think that's the opposite of the mindset we should be creating, we should be fostering players wanting to go out and get better, to continue learning and developing. The Academy Manager very clearly told the SS that regardless of the data being churned out and his flashy degree from a university that this was the real world and absolutely what he wanted at his club! 

As we moved on to have a look at the noticeboards there were stacks of numbers on the board from the last U18 and U21 game. GPS data, HR lines and graphs of a variety of forms for every player. One such graph showed the average running speed for all the players compared with each other. And this is where I start to have an issue. 

For starters, why compare one player with another? In football, where is the value in looking at running data of a full-back and comparing that with that of your centre forward? The goalkeeper made it onto the list as well! Who were the opposition and what type of game was it? Did they have much possession and what tactics were they playing? This data in isolation is meaningless so why show it to everyone?

It is fairly well accepted by those in the know that the defining factor between the good and the great is what is between the ears. Everyone in coaching and recruitment has their own stories of players that have been in the system with amazing technical prowess, tactical nous and built like a machine but the one common factor that has stopped these players progressing was a psychological gap. And I hear this all the time in lots of sports. 

"He wasn't motivated enough"
"He lacked desire and lacked work ethic" 
"He didn't have enough resilience" etc.

And this is where my issue about the resource allocation starts to come into question. 

There are loads of sport scientists in professional sports clubs across the country now, literally thousands of them, all churning out data about our players as machines. However, it becomes very easy that we start to value what we can measure and NOT actually measure what we value. 

I am interested in learning. The development, continued progression of players and the trajectory and path they are on (regardless of age, including the First XI). I would like to know how those players had been improving and developing over periods of time and whether they were on the up, plateau or down. And this is easily done in the world of sports science. 

But I'd like to know about mindset. About their levels of mental toughness. About their grit and resilience. I want to know about the players that have coping skills, the ability to implement these when they need them and adapt to ever changing circumstances in elite sport. Most of all, I want to know who the learners are. Some of these are easier to measure than others, might not be an exact science and I get that, and this is not straight forward by any stretch. 

I was in a Primary School in Hull when a Headteacher started showing me her noticeboards with laminated vases and poems and 'all the learning' that had taken place in Year 5. That's not learning, that's the outcome or 'performance'. The learning is in the five vases that were started but not finished properly because they didn't draw the edge right or the rough copies of poems where that had to scribble out and change words that didn't quite work properly. 

Great work by Ainee McNamara and colleagues (see http://clok.uclan.ac.uk/4826/) highlight some essentials, the determining factors that can differentiate the good from the great but when you then compare this to resource allocation and investment in professional sporting systems this just doesn't add up. 

One professional sports club I know has 15 full-time sport scientists across all age groups and one psychologist that tried to cover everything from U9 to First XI, and this won't be uncommon. The allocation of budgets and resources seems wrong to me. Some of this will come from the 'traditionalists' perception of a psychologist ("lie on my couch and I'll fix you") when in fact the good ones get out on the pitch/court/grass with the player's and act as a performance coach, building on strengths for development, not just putting plasters over problems. 

Fifteen years ago there was a revolution and investment in sports science and all these jobs starting popping up all over sport. It's critical that all the different experts work together and avoid silos, which is easily done too, for the betterment of player development. That's difficult to get right but many are starting to in lots of sports. 

Psychology could well be the next piece of the jigsaw to go through this drive forwards but, until that point, we could be continuing to measure a whole host of stuff that is useful to know but not the determining factor...

Interview with Dario Gradi: a coaching master

After a sabbatical from blogging of six months the start of a New Year is always an extra incentive to get back in the game. I've not been totally sat on my backside in that time, I had a Masters dissertation to get over the line and a small boy to see through from one year old to 18 months so mildly productive! 

However, what I thought I would start 2016 with is sharing some notes from an interview I had with a coaching legend, Dario Gradi. These are a few of the key quotes I took from this and my thoughts/interpretation of his views. Dario has a track record in player development, a rich history in coaching going back decades and is famous for being at the helm of a Crewe Alexandra group that consistently punched above their weight when producing top footballers.

I met Dario in a hotel in the Midlands and he shared some of his coaching views and key people that have influenced him through the years. It was a fascinating couple of hours. Dario talked openly at the start about the guidance he received from his PE teacher, how much he learnt from Dave Sexton about coaching and the mistakes he made at Wimbledon and Crystal Palace. He was very reflective, recognising what went well and what didn't go so well but crucially took learning from those moments. 

Here are some of the top quotes:

"Really nice to feel that I've helped people" - ultimately, this is what coaching is all about. It is simply helping people. As grassroots coaches this might be helping a kid get better at dribbling or passing or just being a better person and learning to tie their laces. But that is what it's all about and it is an easy message to forget. 

"All sessions should flow from one to another, no stopping or starting" - Dario talked about watching coaches spend too long moving cones about and I see exactly the same. With effective planning before the session you can work out how to ensure there is minimal time wasted in moving cones about and setting up different areas or pitches. If you waste 5 minutes a session doing this, multiply that by 30 training sessions a season and all of a sudden you have lost two a half hours of time the kids could be playing and learning and getting better. 

"Still coaches talk too much. I want to see the players play, not the coaches coach" - this is an all too common problem, coaches thinking the session is about them! However, I would elaborate on Dario's point and suggest it is about finding the balance here. Of course, the players need some help and guidance, at the right time, if they are struggling and when you think it is appropriate. This can be done in a variety of ways from talking to the whole group to 'drive-by coaching' and having a little word to one player as the game is going on, without stopping the whole practice. As a general rule, aim to have the ball rolling for about 70% of the session and waste as little time as possible.

"Most important thing coaches can do is make the players want to come back. It has to be enjoyable" - without doubt, this is integral to grassroots coaching, and any level of coaching come to think of it. The players have to fall in love with the game. As a coach, if you are the reason a kid decides to stop playing the game then you have failed, regardless. Fill them with excitement and enthusiasm, fuel a passion for football so burning they can't wait for the next session.

"By 14, teach them to make goals,stop goals and score goals" - the roles of a team really fall into these three areas and players will probably have a career specialising in one of these. However, these are the essential building blocks that players need to learn about as part of a balanced coaching programme. Allow them exposure to all these areas and avoid pigeon-holing them at a particular age because they happen to be bigger or smaller or faster etc.

"When you've shouted at a player has it helped them or just made you feel better? It's not showing passion, it's showing stupidity" - I quite liked the point he was making here and this was part of a big long rant that Dario had. I'm not sure there is ever a need to shout at a kid unless they are in danger and by doing that it makes them avoid it, like a kid running into a road to collect a ball. If a player has made a mistake, it takes their brain less then half a second to work that out and associate a feeling with it. By the time you see this, make sense of it then shout at the player, largely they already know! By shouting at them, this sometimes doesn't really have a lot of impact and Dario was very clear about coaches talking to kids, rather than shouting at them.

"I had to be careful what I said to Nick Powell when I was coaching him as his ideas were often better than mine!" - this shows real humility from Dario as well as an understanding that he doesn't have all the answers. I have done many a session where the players ideas on progressing or developing the practices were better than mine and it's those coaches with an air of arrogance that feel it is about them that are naive enough not to listen. 

There were so many take away messages from Dario that it could be a whole year of blog posts and maybe later in the year I will do another. As coaches, and Dario is certainly an expert coach, consider some of the points he has made and reflect on your own coaching through 2016 and think "am i following the Dario principles?" If you are then you are doing a great job, as Dario would say. 

Why I'm pleased my son is born in May...

It's been a hotly discussed topic for many years, there are countless opinions available relating to the subject but the topic of birth bias keeps rearing it's head. For example, a quick Google search for "relative age effect" brings up over 21,000 articles linked to this and a further search on Scholar raises another 1,300 research pieces on the subject. It's clearly a worldwide and recognised phenomena. 

If you aren't familiar with this it essentially suggests that if you are born in the first few months or half of the 'selection year' for a particular sport you will have more chance of being selected for higher level teams. This brings about the increased opportunity of better facilities, playing with and against better players and working with better coaches. It's akin to the "Matthew Effect". 

The Premier League football academy programme supports just skewed statistics with 57% of players in the system born in the first third of the year (Sept-Dec), with just 14% born in the last four months of the selection year (May-Aug). However, birth rates for children across the year are largely level, there isn't a variance of any major discrepancy that should skew these stats enormously. 

The world of football scouts select their children from grassroots participation - from local leagues that play up and down the country. These leagues are often bias already due to someone's mum or dad making the 'first selection' of players and deciding who plays and sometimes who doesn't. Evidence suggests that it doesn't always mean the quarter 3 and 4 born children don't get to play, it means they might be in teams in lower divisions rather than the top teams. Where do scouts look? Primarily at the top. Therefore, often some of the late developing children might get missed from the system.  

However, I'm going to give an alternative view from my own experiences. 

Being the smallest sometimes isn't a disadvantage, it can be really helpful (if you get IN the system). And that's the challenge. Getting in. However, once you are in the accelerated learning experience you can get compared to others is important to recognise. I have coached Academy teams, full of mixed birthdays and sizes, for the last six years and seen all sorts of kids from different backgrounds come through. 

Here's the thing - I sometimes think that it's the big kids that can be disadvantaged! This is often what you witness in the players...

Player A (early developer):
- Wins most of the physical battles and 1v1's through size and strength.
- Technically more powerful (longer range of passing and shooting from distance).
- Better scores in physical testing such as straight line sprints and jump tests. 
- Less need to focus on learning as success can come from physical advantage.
- Socially dominating due to size and others can be intimidated.

Player B (late developer):
- Loses out when pitted against a giant in outcomes that can be won by strength. 
- Technically often skilful in possession with good agility but less 'impact'.
- Scores lower when benchmarked against players chronologically older.
- Criticised for "not influencing game" or "not getting about the pitch".

However, Player B gets some advantages:
- Has to be a better learner to survive against the older players.
- Solves problems in different ways and comes up with creative solutions as can't use their physical advantage.
- Develops coping and adapting strategies that will serve them well in latter years and key to become an elite player.

The skills that Player B can develop (assuming the right environment is created and the coach recognises the importance of this matter) are huge and in the long term can massively outweigh any early physical dominance. If they have the psychological support and skills they can thrive! But word of caution and don't forget, the early developing Player A could always be the biggest!!

The challenge for coaches is to ensure that we allow all players to develop the mix of skills. The things they gain from being the biggest (self-confidence possibly), can we let the little ones gain this by playing down? The things that the early developers miss out on in their own age group, can we generate this by playing them up against bigger kids so they now have to think differently? I appreciate this solution is easier within the rules for the professional game but many grassroots clubs have mixed age group training nights so some things can be tried. 

The key to all this is patience... Give every kid the same opportunity, not just because they are shaped in a particular way today. See beyond what is in front of you now because the long term will look very different.  

Helping children becoming better players...

It's fairly well recognised that our role as coaches is to help children get better, whether that is becoming better people or better players. However, what is also becoming more apparent to me the more I read about things is that it is ultimately about children becoming better learner's too. 

There are many quotes from inspirational football managers from Pep to Sir Alex that talk about the importance of having a player that can learn but as a grassroots coach what role can we play in that process? Well, there are simple things we can do to encourage young people to develop these skills and foster a brighter outlook towards improvement. 

Self-talk is recognised as playing an important psychological role within both the practice and performance phase of taking part in sport and how a young person uses that inner voice can have an effect on learning. As coaches we spend all of our time trying to help a player master a specific technical aspect or solve a tactical problem but if all the time you are competing against a voice internally in their head that tells them they can't do this it is going to be a real struggle for us. 

The cycle then has the potential to spiral downwards... "I'll never get this" in the player's head becomes the coach thinking "they are hopeless, why can't they understand" and dangerously can move towards the coach considering "I'll find another player that can do this instead" and all because we didn't support their tape being played internally.

So, consider helping the player change those words. Discuss these with them, talk about how it affects them, get them to print them out and stick them on the fridge, use this how you like!

Instead of:                                          Try thinking:
I'm not good at this                             What am I missing?
I'm awesome at this                             I'm on the right track
I give up                                              I'll use some strategies we've learned
This is too hard                                   This may take some time and effort
I can't make this any better                  I can always improve so I'll keep trying
I made a mistake                                 Mistakes help me learn better
Plan A didn't work                               Good job the alphabet has 25 more letters
It's good enough                                  I can still make it better
He's so good, I'll never be that good     I'm going to figure out how he does it to help me

I found this lists on a photo somewhere so not sure where they came from but they were linked to classroom learning. However, these are absolutely appropriate for the sport's world too. 

So, as well as helping the player's with the technical and tactical aspects of the game try affecting the little things that could make a massive difference, to them as player's and as people. 

Techniques to encourage learning...

Ultimately, we are all there to help the kids. Sometimes we help the children with football stuff, sometimes we help them learn to tie their laces - it varies on different days and at different ages. However, our chosen methods to draw out learning from the people in front of you can make a difference on the effectiveness. 

I'm sure you have all been in the same situation: you have just called the players in after a twenty minute 'practice' on something specific and are ready to ask them some questions to see what they have learnt. Then what happens? Well, I observe this a lot, we fire out a problem for them to consider and...

a) the same hands go up first
b) you try a few answers and skip on past the incorrect ones
c) you go to the kid you know will answer correctly

or...the question isn't quite clear enough so there are no forthcoming answers immediately from the players. To avoid awkward silence you ask the question again and slightly rephrase it, hoping to get a response this time. Recognise being in that position?

Research from education suggests that if teachers haven't got the answer they were looking for within 2 seconds they ask it again. Two seconds?! That isn't a very long time for children to think about something! And this is something I see coaches doing also. 

So, in order to aid learning, here are a few things to consider doing or not doing. This blog (http://donaldclarkplanb.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/why-hands-up-teaching-kills-learning.html) offers some great points to think about including:

Asking for hands up:
Be cautious with this approach. The players who's hands go straight up often know the answer so I'm not sure if this extends their learning?

It can also have negative effects to the self-esteem of players that really don't know too.

Does this encourage the children more naturally introverted to answer? Will they be willing to risk putting their hand in front of others with more self-confidence in case they get it wrong? What if the answer involves 'showing' something? Does this just encourage the more technically proficient to answer? 

Have a read of the blog link as this offers further ideas. 

Asking for a no-hands up approach:
I have often used a method that is about not putting their hands up after a group question. With a well constructed question that really focuses on learning, this makes every child think of answer. This means there is a chance I will ask a child that might not be right, but that's ok. It can spark discussion.

I'm also comfortable to wait longer, four or five seconds (which might seem like forever) in order to let players have time to think. You can play around with this method, to get them answering in pairs so half the group answer rather than one in front of everyone etc.

Also...Don't miss the wrong answers!! The wrong answer from a player doesn't mean you keep asking kids until you get the right answer. The wrong answer also tells you exactly where that person is with their level of understanding, and a starting point of where you can extend them from. 

The crux of coaching is beyond the X's and O's - it is about the meaningful interactions between coach (more capable other) and the learner. This is a key place we need to invest our own time in to get better at. Follow good blogs such as the one quoted above and read things like http://www.edutopia.org/blog/asking-better-questions-deeper-learning-ben-johnson for more ideas. 

Then try new stuff out!! We ask the players to be brave and try new things, we have to do the same as coaches...

It's a Team Game...

We have a fascination currently in the country within player development that seems to be growin, at the expense of other key components - and that's the desire to produce a flair, attacking, creative dribbler. A Number 10. 

However, it is essential that we don't lose sight of the bigger picture of what constitutes a team. This is made up of a number of essential parts that allow the whole thing to function effectively, like an well-oiled machine. Even a team of 11 Lionel Messi's wouldn't be very functional!

I saw a statistic today that was somewhat alarming and runs parallel to the matter of our eternal quest for the next Number 10. Since the Premier League season in 2000, there is a 15% decrease in the number of English centre halves. This is a hugely important matter and should influence our shaping of player development.

So, what does the team at the elite level consist of:

- Leaders of others

- Workers like soldier ants

- Ones with a tall stature that protect the goal

- Physically dominant players that 'allow' others to play

- Skillful players in possession

- Jokers that keep the team together

- Sensible people that keep the team together

- Technical players that can manipulate the ball

- Selfish ones with a desire to score goals

- Older heads that support the youthful exuberance

- Younger and enthusiastic players to push boundaries

- Attack minded by nature

- Defence minded by nature

- Tactical thinkers that understand the game

I'm sure there are more essential roles and you can add to the list within the comments section but we cannot lose sight of the bigger picture. Yes, it's essential we allow the players to experiment through free play and within an environment that expresses creativity and the ability to try new things. 

But also don't forget you need players that are going to throw their head in the way to block a goal-bound shot and do all the ugly stuff when we don't have possession to get the ball back. It's the fully functioning team unit that ultimately allows our creative, game winning players to do their stuff. 

The question for you as coaches is how do we set up our sessions to ensure we: 

a) allow all of these skills to develop? 

b) value the importance of these?

c) recognise these in players?

Just a thought...

    

Coaching Session - Attacking Play 1v1's

Through the wonders of social media I see a multitude of coaching sessions, it's a fantastic tool to share thoughts and ideas, so figured it was about time I posted part of one of mine! Developing ball mastery and the ability to beat people in a 1v1 situation is a common topic for coaches to help players get better at so below are some views on this, linked to sound learning principles.

Make the practice real:

Unless I am much mistaken, there are no cones acting as defenders on a football pitch, and real defenders have the ability to move about! They make things a bit more tricky than a static piece of plastic from my experience! Good learning knowledge would lend us to ensure that we make the practice authentic and answer the question - what would happen in a real game? That should be the basis for all our sessions. 

The traditional view of assuming that players need to 'learn something in isolation before adding some more pressure and then putting into a game' is not necessarily always the answer from a learning perspective. Effective learning research would suggest that the attacker being able to recognise the cues and triggers of HOW the defender is acting leads them to the solution they want to use. 

Problem faced = Leads to Solution. 

In this case it is: (defender to beat and he is fast/slow/right/left etc) = (attacker chooses particular move to solve problem). 

In trying different solutions to solve that problem, learning takes place. The attacker can start to recognise which solution might be the answer to that specific conundrum. For example, an attacker will realise that doing their trick too far away from the defender means the opponent has chance to react and change their defensive tactic again. This comes from experiencing this, against a real person. Doing this against a cone doesn't allow this learning opportunity to occur. 

Now, I am aware some people will believe that players have to have the technique developed first BEFORE they can use it against a real person. Evidence is starting to suggest otherwise. Yes, they will need a basic level of movement skills to be able to perform a 1v1 but allow them to explore different moves themselves. This provides them, through a cleverly constructed game, the chance to understand WHY. Evidence also suggests that the technique they learn in isolation isn't exactly the one they use in the game - so why spend half hour drilling something that doesn't exactly replicate?! 

Make use of your coaching skills:

As adults we are there to help. This might take a variety of forms at different times but in this situation we are there to help children get better in 1v1's. As the children are playing the game, getting lots of repetition of dribbling moves against different defenders, this is where observation skills are crucial.

Who can do different things moves and sort things out themselves?

Who might not quite have things worked out....yet?

When do I step in and help or see if they can self-correct?

Below are notes of mine for some 1v1 games I was doing (excuse the rough scribbles though, this was purely for my own pocket at the time!) Whilst the children are rotating round the different pitches, getting lots of repetition and experiences of similar but slightly different things I'm watching intently, not saying much. 

If I need to go and help an individual, or ask them a question or two, or bring them over to me to work on something specific, or give them a little piece of advice...that's coaching! 

Make the game relevant:

You will spot from my scribbles that different pitches are laid out for the 1v1 practices in varied parts of the pitch. Consider these:

How does a 1v1 look in a wide area compared to a central area?

How does a 1v1 look high up the pitch around the penalty box compared to in the midfield area?

How does a 1v1 look when you receive the ball with back to goal or if attacking from the front?

How do you start a 1v1 if you receive the ball from the side or from behind?

The answers to the above are "it's different every time"! 

If you are dribbling to beat a full-back in a wide area you (typically) have more space you can use in front, to the side and possibly behind the defender. You might also have in mind a cross as an end product. This affects your decision making and the choices you make.

If you are dribbling at a central back at the top of the 18yd box in a central area there will be a lot less space in all areas, likely to be other players nearby and have a different end product in mind to the wide area dribble. Again, spotting these affects what we do.

So the 1v1 has to be different! Therefore, why do we do a 1v1 game that has no context to where on the pitch this would occur or what the end product might be? I have lost count of the amount of times I did this when I was a younger coach until this dawned on me!

As you read this post, think about your last 1v1 session, how you did it and consider what you might change in light of reading the above. Be great to hear your views on where you would take the session next too!

The Evolution of Learning

As generations progress we are getting smarter with our understanding of the learning process. Many myths about learning appear along the way that unfortunately can get swallowed up and accepted as common practice (e.g. NLP, learning styles, right/left brain thinking) and requires us to think carefully about the methods for helping players learn. However, what is becoming clear is that young people are an evolving type of learning animal and have different views and outlooks on the process than previous generations. This post will look to examine a few of these and the implications for coaches. 

Access to information:

Back in the days of only four TV channels (mostly in black and white) and with Match of the Day being the only opportunity to see football if you didn't go to live games, the coach was crucial. The coach was the essential component in passing on information to the next generation because the richness of content wasn't available. The coach was King!

However, children growing up today cannot remember a life without the internet and social media. If they don't know something they will Google it. When I did my Level 2 in 1997 Google didn't exist and certainly wasn't accepted as a term for 'searching and learning'. We call it "technology" but for them, it's just "the way it is".

Today, children can watch worldwide football on Sky Sports and have 24/7 access to learning tools, clips and tricks of every top player via You Tube. They don't need the coach to 'demo' a specific turn in the same way as years gone by when that child might not have seen it. Today, they are showing the coaches and this can be cleverly planned for.

Consider

How do you use technology yourself? Do you embrace it or a technophobe?

How can it be used to support learning in sessions and away from sessions?

How can you use it to save you time when interacting with parents?

Coach tells v Player constructs meaning:

Many of us will have grown up through an educational system that consisted of the teacher at the front of the class, the font of all knowledge, telling those sat in front of them everything they need to know about a subject (copying down what they said). I still see lots of coaches that deliver in this way to groups of children and I'm not surprised - this was what they experienced in their education process and research tells us you often 'teach' the way that you were taught. 

However, many views exist now that it is the learner that constructs meaning. Everyday a variety of different stimuli and sources of information will be presented to a person and they make sense of this, through their eyes and building on their existing view of the world. Learning is not necessarily a coach downloading what is in their head into a player's hard drive!

Today, the modern player arrives at your session in a different 'learning' place to every other player. They have all had different experiences, know a varied amount of things and can put this into practice at differing levels. Some will know exactly what is right but might not be able to do it...yet. Some will be able to do something really good and not know why or how, and that's OK too. 

Consider

How can you critically reflect on your teaching process? 

How do you present information for the learner to make sense of it themselves?

How do you structure questions effectively for players to have to think?

The right way:

I've witnessed it countless times and done it myself - "To do a Cruyff turn you must put your foot here, your non-kicking foot must be here...." because that is the right way to do something. Previously, traditional learners will have been brought up thinking there was in fact a right way to do something and this was the way that was passed down from teacher to learner from generation to generation. 

However, the modern learner now considers that there isn't necessarily a right way. There are probably lots of different solutions to certain problems and they want to be able to experiment and solve these problems themselves. They recognise that learning is done collaboratively, shared globally and they want to involve others - searching out for answers through friends, social networks, mentors and others. 

Today, with the wide variety of tricks and skills shown by top players everyday I'm not convinced we can show that their is a "right way". Information during a game around you changes all the time and that influences how you do a particular skill. For example, is a 1v1 in a wide area different to a 1v1 at the top of the penalty box? Absolutely. Is a 1v1 against a fast player different to doing a 1v1 against a slower player? Definitely. What if you approach them from a different angle or at a different speed? It's never the same, but maybe similar. 

Consider

How can you teach the principle of the action rather than be prescriptive of the action?

How can help players recognise the cues that determine their choice of move?

How can you develop games that encourage them to do the problem solving?

 

There are loads of things to think about as learning and our understanding of it develops and this blog just hoped to give a flavour of some of these. The modern learner is different to a traditional learner and because you learnt that way doesn't mean that today's child will do. They have been born in another time, as the Chinese proverb says. You wonder why the player's sometimes mess about during sessions? It might be linked to your approach towards their learning.

We need to be smart with our games and practices that empower young people to make decisions for themselves because I can guarantee, once they step over that white line to play, it's all about them and children's sport should not be PlayStation for adults...

Seeing the game through their eyes...

At a coaching conference this year I had a good discussion with a couple of coaches. I was sat in front of them watching a practice going on and listening to them commentating of the game and their opinion of what every player should have done differently at a variety of moments in the game. It made me think. How do they know?

The final comment that prompted me to ask them a question or two occurred after one lad got down the left wing to the by-line and into the box and stabbed a ball across the front, which got cut out, with his right foot. The guys behind proceeded to say how he should have played the ball with his left foot, should have done this, should have done that... 

My question to them was - "how do you know what he saw?"

As coaches, we are very quick to make judgements from our viewpoint, through our eyes and from our position. But we have ZERO idea what they saw. We have even less idea about what they were trying to do, until we start a conversation with the player. 

It was an interesting discussion. How apparently he was all one-footed. How he should have used his left foot to pull it back. But through my lens I saw things a little different. I'd like to know:

- What did you see?
- What did you try and do?
- Why did you choose that specific technique?
- What would you do next time?

Because, whilst it could have been what they said was wrong, it also could have been the lad thinking he wanted to play it quickly off his front foot, in his stride, as he didn't have the time to wait for his left foot. He might have made the right decision and just got the technique wrong. Who knows. 

Or we could have talked it and it could have been the same answer the coaches' suggested. But that is my point, until we speak to the player, talk through the 'moment' from their set of eyes (not ours) we are guessing. Guessing!

So next time you consider shouting at a player on the other side of the pitch for doing something different to what you thought they should have done, think about pausing and see if you can find out what they saw. Explore the world through their eyes. 

Personal Development - It's all down to you

This post comes in direct response to two different things, both of which might be able to be answered through one ramble. The first is in response to several questions raised at our National Coaching Conference and something I hear fairly regularly - "I have a sports science degree from University of x, why can't I get a job in a professional club Academy?" The second is the question I get asked reasonably often too - "what was my career pathway to end up in the role I have?"

Hopefully by sharing some of my story (note: it's MY story, not anyone else's) it might help some of the people that ask the first question a lot. There is a generation of young people now that come out of university and expect the world on a plate, that they will walk straight into a top paying job at a top establishment. There was an article in the Daily Telegraph a few years back about 'Graduate Divas', the young people born in the late-1980's as part of Generation Y that think the world owes them a living and they expect everything without hard work. 

Of course, and this goes without saying, not all young people fall into that category. I know lots of tremendously hard working individuals that have gone way over and above the expected to develop themselves. They have given themselves a broad range of experiences and skills, beyond their piece of university paper, and sought these out. They rightly deserve opportunities later down the line. It's the ones that just expect it that are the issue. 

My Journey:

As I mentioned above, this is my journey. It's unique to me. I have worked in sports development my whole (proper) working life but different parts have played their role and shaped me as a person.

School

I started coaching when I was still at school, helping the PE teachers run inter-form activities for younger year groups in football and other sports. The lesson for me was clear - I need to do something that I am passionate about and working with young people in sport was certainly that.

University

I did a Sport and Leisure Management Degree at university, had an interesting time for three years. Whilst I wouldn't say the degree helps me in the job, it was more the learning about myself in those years that made the biggest difference. To be honest, my course was about 9 - 12 hours of lectures a week and the rest of the time I just spent playing football with mates! However, I also did a few coaching badges during the time that started me further on this road. 

Coaching

During the summer holidays between my second and third year I came home and coached all summer with a guy that has remained a good friend to this day. He is sooo old skool it is frightening! He knows it, I tell him this and we debate this often! At that time however I didn't know any different. He was an experienced coach, had his UEFA B' and therefore was the role model I aspired to be. Surely he was right, wasn't he? So I tried to copy him. For acceptance? Maybe. 

After university I went and did three months coaching in the US. When I say 'coaching' it probably wasn't but it was a hugely valuable experience and a very enjoyable time. Three months travelling round California, Nevada and bit of Utah was fascinating. I coached all sorts of players, from 5 and 6 year old children where I ran around singing 'Old MacDonald' to working with high quality girls team's that could truly play the game. It gave me a real varied insight into working with different groups, how I had to change my coaching style, what worked and what didn't. 

Work

I came home from the US and needed a job. I went to an interview for a job in Milton Keynes. I had to deliver a session as part of the interview in a sport I wasn't qualified in - I did a netball session that was basically a football game with hands. It was my relationship with the kids that made a big difference - I enjoyed working with them, they had fun and gave me a glowing report. 

So I moved 100 miles from home for my first job out of uni that paid £15,000 per year. The next two years saw me teach football to primary and secondary age children, boccia to children with disabilities, develop all sports within the school and gain a great insight into a whole host of things. If the table tennis coach didn't turn up I would deliver. If the basketball coach was running late I would take the session. I was also doing outreach sessions in the local community, offering sessions for old people to keep them active and for those out of work. 

I did a variety of coaching qualifications along the way too, including Level 1's in cricket, basketball, hockey, netball and badminton.

Whilst all this was going on I was shaping my coaching philosophy and influenced by lots of people around me. I started running a girls U12 team at a Centre of Excellence and had some great times there. I made lots of mistakes, got lots of feedback from the players and learnt some valuable lessons. 

County FA

After three years I changed jobs to focus solely on football development. Again, this started to have a big impact. I was fortunate to start working for some great people at this time including Les Howie and Donna McIvor; colleagues of today. Working at the CFA allowed me to really get out there and understand how grassroots sport worked. I was working with coaches and volunteers every night of the week, from running club development workshops to child protection training. 

This taught me about the importance of relationships - internally and externally. It frustrates me hugely now hearing about development staff that aren't allowed to leave the office. Development work is about people and relationships between them and you don't develop these through email. I knew everyone in clubs and most of the Heads of PE and the schools and colleges too - we never had coaching courses cancelled because we could always fill them through our networks. 

FA

I moved to a national role at the FA in Jan 2004, to manage our young leadership programme and club links work. The grounding of working in education and football development made a big difference. 

Young leadership is awesome. I loved watching the young people in the programme grow right in front of you, developing into fantastic young adults with a real skill set that could change the world. The work of Harry Shier and Roger Hart was a big influence at this stage - give young people a voice and choice on matters that affect them. It's not about me, it's about them. 

My next role was to set up the FA Skills Programme, working with Tesco as the sponsor. Fascinating times and really powerful for my development. I was now in and around coaches that I would truly class as 'experts' every day - John Allpress, Pete Sturgess, Paul Holder - and if you can't learn from them then you may as well change careers! We also did a piece of work with Brunel University, a guy called Richard Blair who really challenged thinking and professionalised what our coaches were doing. And I sat in these sessions, taking notes, listening and learning. 

Playing and Refereeing

Has being a player helped my understanding? 100% yes. Whilst I was never a top professional, I played 400+ games in the non-league and Futsal at international level. I worked with some great coaches that have also shaped my views on coaching and learning. Some good, some not so good but you learn from them all. 

I also thought it would be good to see things from a refereeing perspective so did that for a season too. I refereed adult park football in my county, proper Division 10 stuff and really enjoyed that. It's very easy to moan at the person wearing black but I can empathise now having experienced this, and speak from a position of credibility on the matter.

Reading

Throughout this time I was doing a lot of reading. A lot! My bookcase expanded tremendously and it has made a massive difference in my career. I wouldn't say I was widely read but I have made the effort to try and read things - whether academic articles or coaching/learning books. Less 'football' ones too. For example, Lynn Kidman, Raener Martens and Guy Claxton all gave a tremendous insight into what really is 'coaching' and player development.

Courses

Doing qualifications is important, of course, but is a tiny part of what shapes your philosophy and understanding. Estimates from elite coaches are they affect your development 10-15%. 

The FA Youth Coaches Course in 2005 was superb, gave a totally different view of the coaching world than the experience I had through the traditional pathway and was the pre-cursor to the FA Youth Awards. I've gone on to complete the FA Advanced Youth Award but Module 1 is still my favourite course!

More Coaching

Whilst at the FA I have ran a grassroots U8's team to mentoring coaches in the U14 teams. Running the kids team was great, the reality of never knowing who or how many were going to turn up to training each week. We were a poor team, lost every week, but the one game we won that season will stick with me for a whole host of reasons forever. 

Since then I have done six years in an Academy, working with talented boys. This was five years at U10 and one at U11. Some coaches have aspirations to get through the age groups to older ones as quick as possible, fuelled by a variety of different motives, but I wanted to be the best U10 coach I could be. 

Additional Parts

If there was an opportunity to get involved in something that would help my learning and development I would do it! I would travel a few hours to see a coach work if he/she was an expert and someone I could learn from. 

I'm coming towards the end of a Masters degree and halfway through a Level 4 course in Talent Identification. I was asked to be on the Board at a schools Academy Trust and without knowing what it was about, threw myself into it! I am well out my depth at times when I look round the other Board members but learn something every time we meet and invariably I can translate to my coaching or job. 

Summary

In no way was this ramble set out to be a 'look at me, aren't I great' piece like a few I read. I'm still learning every day, know I have so much to do in order to be a better person and a better dad. However, hopefully it can give a sense of the breadth of different activities I have been involved in along my journey so far. 

Nothing comes easy, you have to go out of your way to work hard and the world owes you nothing. You cannot sit back and wait for your break to happen, thinking you deserve it. 

When I worked at the Academy and got requests from coaches to come in and observe sessions, brilliant, they are the guys I want on my team all day long. 

Helping Players Learn: The "WHY" of Coaching Styles

On my travels I hear lots of different comments about coaching styles; what is good, what is bad and how if anyone says "stop stand still" they should immediately be deported to Jurassic Park. However, It isn't quite as simple as that. 

Whilst we might not have a clue what learning has taken place in the immediate term (whether they actually directed their focus towards the learning objective plus some learning will be implicit) the only thing we can control is what comes out of our mouth's as coaches. Therefore, I would strongly advocate a couple of things:

1. Understand WHY you are going to use a specific coaching style
2. Plan this as part of your session preparation before you start

There are a variety of different frameworks to help understand this further and the wonders of Google Scholar will help with more reading. The one I like specifically is that of Mosston and Ashworth (2002) which puts forward a continuum of styles from Command (Style A) at one end to Self-Teaching (Style K) at the other end. This doesn't state that any one style is better or worse than another, just that they help facilitate different outcomes. The key to this is knowing why you are using a specific method to help the players. 

Here are a few on the spectrum with a little bit about them:

Command Style: All the decisions are made by the coach and the players are told what to do and how to do it.
What's it good for: Short-term development of technique (unopposed practices).
Risk: Limited long-term ability to take this into games or retention of information.

Guided Discovery: Coach decides where the learners are going to go and leads them towards the answer.

What’s it Good For: Developing thinking skills and technical ability.

Risk: Lack of knowledge by the coach in understanding what questions to ask and when.

Divergent Discovery: Coach presents a problem and learners find their own solution.

What’s it Good For: Enhance game understanding and technical ability plus social and emotional development.

Risk: Lack of knowledge by the coach in understanding how to organise and structure this.

Individual Programme: Coach decides content and learners plan and design the programme. 

What’s it Good For: Enhance game understanding and technical ability plus personal development.

Risk: Willingness of coach to let go of the power and trust the players and players ability to do it. 

Therefore, if you are doing a game where you are looking to develop the decision-making and problem solving skills of the players, using command style is not going to be anywhere near as effective as another style further down the spectrum. Equally, if you are looking to develop creativity in a specific part of the practice, you will be better served using Divergent Discovery, where the players can head towards no specific solution but the teaching can allow them to find their own solutions to the problem posed. 

In summary, it really helps to plan your coaching styles at different times, but equally knowing your players is really important here too. I used to coach one lad that had autism and ADHD and he needed small chunks of information that were very clear and explicit. Asking loads of questions to him was just not going to work.

All I will say in closing this entry is just beware, you stepping in to stop a practice to give a player the answer might just take away from the moment when they were just about to work it out for themselves! Not easy, this coaching lark....