Reflecting, Observing and Mentoring

Our lecture this week in Sport coaching pedagogy, saw us look at coaches reflecting and mentoring.  Whilst Keith was discussing how coaches reflect and observe their athletes from a distance, it made me think about what is more ideal for coaching when providing feedback, especially those in team sports.

In sports such as AFL, coaches are split to whether they watch and observe the game from a box up high with their assistant coaches, before reflecting and providing the players feedback or being on the sideline to provide instant feedback to players in the game and feeling the intensity of the game.

So my first discussion point of the week is there a particular situation were these different observation points are better than the other? And also whether in individual sports this situation changes from your experiences?

During Keith’s lecture he also discussed mentors roles in sport.  It’s a role that is now so common in team sports, as ex-players of the sport are being employed to nurture and advise young inexperienced players through the beginning of their careers.

However I ask the question to whether sporting teams are currently employing mentors as head coaches on their reputation of their playing days and the team uses assistant coaches as ‘the brains’ and for the planning that is involved or that in fact that the head coach is the best person for the job?

In terms of individual sports I think a coach needs to be diverse and be able to serve as a mentor and coach to the athlete. As discussed in Sarah Taylor and Leigh Sherman's previous blog, although experience in the sport is not essential when coaching, however elite sporting experience is as you can relate to what pressure and circumstances that an athlete may be struggling with.

 Anyway let me know your thoughts. 

Do you need to be a good athlete to be a good coach?

Whilst watching a video during the week 5’s lecture, Keith raised the question to whether you need to be a good athlete to become a good coach. 

This is a question that for me had a lot to it and it my opinion is best answered by examples.

Some of the best coaches in many sports have not been convincing at the top level for example Wayne Bennett in rugby league, Mick Malthouse in AFL and John Buchanan in cricket and these three coaches have gone on to be 3 of the most successful in their sports.

On the other hand a coach I have often admired is Ric Charlesworth, who reached the pinnacle in two different sports (cricket and hockey) and has gone on to be the most successful Australian hockey coach in both male and female teams.

When comparing these four coaches, it is obvious that their coaching philosophy is similar and after reading Aidan Brown's blog it is obvious they are cooperative coaches (aka the teachers) who break the down the sport, but focus on key components or their given sport and are always motivating their athletes to strive for perfection.

This question also makes it worth noting parent- sibling relationships in sport. As parents are often going to have a huge influence on their siblings sporting careers. This is very common in individual sports such as tennis where often coaches are close relatives to the players for example Rafael Nadal and his Uncle Miqual who was not a successful tennis player.  On the otherhand there is some parents and relatives who prefer to observe or play little role in they’re relatives sporting careers such as Gary Ablett who has had no influence over his sons footballing careers.

Although I’m sitting on the fence to this question I think I have identified that you don’t have to necessary be an successful athlete to become an successful coach.

But after having my say I would like to know yours!!!

Coaching approaches

Hi guys back for my second post for 2012!!!

Our second lecture in SCP focused on the Coach as the performer and it involved a video montage of successful but controversial coaches. Between my group of mates this generated a discussion to the different type of coaches involved in sport and how they go about getting the best out of their players.

Rugby league is a great example of this, as every coach has a different way of getting the best out of his players.

Wayne Bennett is a relaxed coach that likes to calm his players, whilst telling the players what they are right and wrong. On the other hand there is a coach like Craig Bellamy who is just as successful as Wayne, but is an intense coach that is more aggressive in his approach to get the best out of the players.

This discussion made me think that coaching a team sport is that more difficult as you have 10-20 people to get the best out of. Everyone of those players are going to react differently to your approach as a coach and it makes me think sometimes rather than doing a group speech at half time with the whole team if you should individually address the players to get the best out of them? Or is this the role of an assistant coach or senior players in the team?

Let me know your thoughts.

Cheers