One of the cornerstones of my coaching philosophy is the saying " Winning is a consequence, focus on the process and the results will come". It is a saying that was in the player manual I would hand out to my players, on our code of conduct and part of many a discussion.
This was not to say that I didn't or don't value winning, quite on the contrary, as a both a player and coach, I had a driving obsession about winning. When I played, I wanted to win every mini game, scrimmage, exhibition of our course games. As a coach, that desire to win was still there but it was tempered with the realization that there are many factors which affect results which are out of a coaches or players control. The goal was to ensure that as a group, we made sure that everything within our control was focused on, every foreseeable scenario had a planned response and that we executed to the best of our ability. If we did that well, then more often than not, we would give ourselves a chance to win. However, the debate about how coaches work with their groups, whether it is about coaching to win or coaching develop is most important is a discussion that always takes place. Winning ! It’s become a taboo word, not just in soccer but in all youth sports. Most recently the debate has become an issue of coaches choosing winning or development, as if they are mutually exclusive. Coaches who develop players the right way don’t have to choose either or because winning and development go hand in hand, but first you will have to understand what “winning” truly means. When you look at sports from an overall view, there are fewer winners than there are losers. At the end of a season, there is one champion or league winner, not a majority. So does that mean that only the winners are successful and that all losers are not? The idea we face today that winning doesn’t matter, only development, stems from the extreme “win at all costs” mentality that many involved with any youth sport promote. Because of that extreme, the polar opposite has arisen where we tell our players that winning doesn’t matter, and here is our ultimate issue. Winning matters. But development matters more. Let’s understand that. They both matter. There’s a score at the end of the game, there is generally a “winning” team and a “losing” team in games. There’s a reason, however, that there are quotations around both those words. What does winning mean after all? Does winning mean having the better score in a U7 league game? Does winning mean a team that goes unbeaten in Division 1 in their U8 group? To some, yes. For me, “winning” or more specific a “winning mentality” means players who are hungry and determined to give 100% at improving everything they do. Inspire our youth to be hungry and motivated to improve constantly at whatever they do, and soon the hunger to win games will also develop. Too often, however, we start on the wrong end. Let’s first look at the argument of why “winning over development” survives to this day, and then let’s look at what the kids think. This is their game, after all. By the early teens, around the ages of 13 or 14, almost 3/4 of kids involved in organized sports drop out of the game. Often, the reasoning is that they aren’t “having fun anymore” and they’ve lost interest. Here is where “winning at all costs” comes to life. After all, when adults take their own personal experience, winning is always equated to fun. They fondly remember their time as a player, coach, or even spectator, and the elation that came from winning. The equation is simple with the “win at all costs mentality”: If kids aren’t winning, kids will want to drop out because they aren’t having fun. Who enjoys losing? It’s a poisonous idea that permeates through all aspects of youth sports and is one of the major factors that sees kids dropping out of organized sport at an alarming rate. Read again, the “win at all costs” adultification of youth sports is the most damaging aspect of youth development. Do kids want to win games? Yes, but how long do they dwell on losses as compared to mom and dad? By the early teens, around the ages of 13 or 14, almost 3/4 of kids involved in organized sports drop out. It’s a fact worth repeating, and in all this debate, adults are the ones throwing around what kids want. It’s fascinating when a parent is explaining what their seven year old son or daughter wants. If you were to ask the kids directly what they want out of sports, I think the answers would be quite surprising, well maybe not surprising if you are in tune with youth sports, but let's says quite different from the answers that might arise if the same questions were asked of parents. I think and somewhat from experience, I believe kids and teens when asked about what they enjoy about participating in sports would answer they participated in sports because it was fun. Fun, however, means a lot of different things for a lot of different people. Trying your best, being treated with respect by the coach, and getting playing time are the most important factors that kids define fun by. Tournaments and trophies? Not up there, sorry folks. This is fun for one group, certainly, but unfortunately they aren’t the one’s playing. Trying your best is essentially the idea of giving 100%. It’s that winning mentality, and if we can continue to foster it, we are one step ahead of the game in helping to create “winners.” Kids generally forget about results soon after the game is over. The game is really won or lost, however, in the car ride home. As Project Play explains, kids often forget about the result ten minutes after a game is over, but are often reminded of it constantly in the car-ride home and at dinner that day. We are responsible for the environment we create for our players and our children. If you think your son or daughter’s value lies in winning a medal at the end of the year, even if they have (which is often the case in “win at all costs” mentality) regressed in technical development or tactical awareness, then you would much prefer playing in division 5 where your team wins 7-0 every game. You’ll get a lot of trophies to put on the mantelpiece, but they’ll all stop after a certain age. The obsession for short term success had decidedly destroyed the long term possibilities for players. Instead of harping on the most recent scoreline in your league game, why not watch the game and see where your son or daughter could improve. Why not explain to them, as coaches should be doing also, that they have to strive for perfection within themselves before they worry about perfection manifested in scorelines and results. At 7, are we talking about perfection? No, but we are extolling the values of hard work, a never-quit attitude, and always working to get better. That’s what perfection is. Winning is important, but development is more important. Develop the winning mentality, see kids take ownership of their own technical development, understanding that one hour of practice a week is not enough, and watch the results come, eventually. Eventually is the key word here. Don’t expect this to happen over the course of a week, a season, maybe even a year. Development is not a straight line. Ups will come with downs, and development does not mean constant, unchecked progression. Unfortunately, as many coaches who value proper development know, it isn’t always easy. It takes a village to educate a child. Coaches can and should do their part to ensure they are developing a player for long term success, but we need help from parents to. The environment we create for these players is of the utmost importance. Next time you’re watching your son or daughter play, forget the result at the end. The result only serves to guide your player on what they need to improve on, nothing more. I have dozens of trophies and medals from my own days playing sports as a youth, and to be completely honest, I barely remember any of them. As a coach, my fondest memory isn’t the victories I’ve had with different teams. Nor is it the playoff appearances, or tournaments I’ve been to or even won. My fondest memories are much more simple, and much more memorable. They almost always related to emails, texts or discussions I might get from or have with former players who thank me for creating an environment where they felt they could thrive in, or that through my coaching, it gave them a skill set they could apply to their lives beyond sport. Those are as valid as looking back on results. The focus wasn’t on short term success. It was always much larger than that. Develop and win. One comes before the other, and for good reason.
0 Comments
Hello again
So why the title for today's blog post ? Well quite frankly, I’m done with the gender bias fueled debate about the validity and quality the seemingly constant need to defend women’s sports. It’s exhausting. It’s like any disagreement where fact and opinion are used interchangeably by outsider, knowledge lacking, never participated individuals, who seem to get a sense of personal self worth from speaking what they consider a position of indisputable knowledge about a topic they really have no clue about. I always find it ironic how some individuals will refer to women's ( or girl's ) sports as some sort of watered down, lower quality version of " the real thing" but who might in the same breath try and explain how watching the Little League World Series is a great showcase for baseball. It is fascinating how even today, with expanded coverage of women's sport ( I use the term expanded loosely here but coverage of women's sports is a whole other topic which I have written about a few times), that there are still significant individuals who can demean women's sports for no other reason than they are played in by females. I have shared an anecdote in the past with a little update which I feel is both very relevant to this discussion and shows that while there is progress in interest towards women's sports, it isn't nearly where it should be. Back in the summer of 2003, my wife and I took an organized sports tour down to New York to watch a game between Manchester United and Juventus. On the way back, the organizer started playing a game of sports trivia both asking questions and soliciting questions. My wife stood and asked " Which Canadian soccer player has earned the most caps ( caps being number of times representing the country for those not soccer knowledgeable) ? The group being predominantly make started throwing out a bunch of names, of course all male and all of them being wrong answers. After much consternation but these so called soccer experts who were convinced that they had the right answer and of course it being before the era of smart phones where info could be quickly verified, my wife gave the correct answer as being " Charmaine Hooper", at the time the most decorated female player. A few of the males were quick to point out that " that's women's soccer, it doesn't really count". The fact I had to hold my wife back from climbing over the seat to strangle someone adds an amusing twist to the story but not really relevant. So now fast forward to summer of 2018 and via twitter, I tried the same experiment by asking the exact same question. Sure enough, the answers started coming back as all male players, finally someone clicked and gave "Christine Sinclair". So here's a little sign of progress, no one came forward to somehow discredit her achievement as being less significant because she was a female player, but yet, in the face of a non gender specific question, the assumption remains to first think of the male game. Every Women’s World Cup ( just the fact we have to specify women's but not men's says something ) , every NCAA women’s finals, every Olympics, women’s sports again go on a media trial about how those winner or champions might stack up against the male equivalent. Why is that even a topic for discussion. Why is determining how the winner of a Women's World Cup might stack up against a male team important ? Do we ask ourselves how the winner of the World Junior Hockey Championships might fare against an NHL team ? Of course not, because sports are or should be about who are the winner among their peers, not against every other possible form or level of competition in the same sport. However for many the discussion always comes down to why “no one cares,” or whether women’s sports are as good as men’s sports. It’s tired. It’s also way behind where people actually are and also increasingly irrelevant. While some continue to be flag bearers to the axiom that “no one cares about women's sports, many female sports like the Women’s World Cup, female Olympic events and emerging female professional pro leagues are starting to garner interest that would make many a marketer or broadcast medium leap with joy. A very small percentage of sport news broadcasts or even broadcasts on sports specialty stations are devoted to women’s sports, which when they are seem to be discussed there by anchors with the joy and flair of kids forced to “eat their vegetables," enthusiasm. Truth be told, more and more people are choosing to get their news from different sources if the current ones don’t meet their needs. It’s a distorted marketplace: one where the financial value of male professional sports like football, basketball, and baseball has never been higher, as witnessed by the huge broadcast rights contracts and player contracts announcement by the major sports leagues. However, let's be clear, this value is not a function of any sort in increase in their popularity but of the fact that these sports have become the weight bearing column that keeps the basic-cable television industry upright: the last programming in the current streaming or PVR reality that people will still endure commercials to watch. The desperation with which cable networks cling to these sports and aggressively market them under the guise bring the only mainstream sports of interest, distorts how many people demand this kind of coverage and how many are just force-fed what the commercial imperatives are of the basic cable industry. Meanwhile, as the media cling to the past and put women’s sports on trial with regularity, female athletes are raising the bar throughout the sports world. There are more and more mediums via which to access sports coverage and those that have the initiative and foresight to start to covering women's sports may field themselves with access to a market with a huge upside, people ( not just females) with an appetite to have access to high caliber women's sports and not just every 4 years during the Olympics. So I’m done “defending” women’s sports. Frankly, it’s insulting to the athletes involved to even conceive of it as if they need defending. It’s time to go on offense. It’s time to write more about women’s sports and be part of the grassroots struggle to do what the sports networks and sports-radio outlets won’t do, and that’s tell the stories of what is happening in women’s sports. I am not an apologist for women's sports but someone who is truly a fan. Whatever led me to this point, or caused me at some point to see my involvement in coaching as something more than about wins and losses but about advocating so that my athletes, my female athletes get the recognition and support they deserve, will continue on even as my active involvement in coaching has come to an end. If you like something, why limit yourself. Good soccer is good soccer whether played by male pros, female pros, youth players, or anything in between. Let's stop comparing sports by gender and just take them at face value for what they are. different forms of the same great sports. If you wish to revisit some of my prior posts on women's sports, you can do so via these links womens-soccer-is-mainstream.html investing-in-womens-sports-a-smart-move.html discrimination-and-bias-in-womens-sports-still-happening.html differences-for-womens-soccer-and-sports-in-general-that-many-dont-realize-or-want-to-acknowledge-maybe.html my-struggle-to-grow-womens-soccer.html This is not the first time I write a post about women in coaching roles. It isn't even the second one. I like to describe myself as an advocate for women's sports and women in sport and when I do, that doesn't mean just taking about female athletes and getting them equitable support and breaking down the barriers of gender bias and stereotypes, it covers women in all roles involved with sport. Furthermore, it isn't about women coaching women ( or girls) or being in administrative roles for women's sports, but more women in sport period ( as in gender neutral).
As is true for many serious young athletes, sports have shaped their lives and identities. The experiences that come with sport participation can be very defining for athletes, not male or female athletes, but athletes period. Coaches can be significant influences on athletes of all ages, providing guidance, leadership, and comfort when needed. Some coaches spend years with athletes from the younger ages to the teenage years and into young adulthood. most influential coaches guided her for years. Some coaches can be more influential on youth than teachers. The reality is that for many young athletes, of both genders, there is one common thread that links them all together; they are for the most part male, even in today's societal reality. It may simply be my humble opinion or perception but it seems that the coaching profession falls far behind other areas in terms of gender inequity and barriers to accessing roles. Much attention and worry has been devoted to the decline of female coaches at the more competitive levels as the investment if women's sports has improved over time. As coaching women's teams at the national team, university or other highly competitive levels became more lucrative, men have been seeking these coaching roles and the decision makers , also males, have tended to give it to them over as qualified if not more qualified women. What doesn't often gather notice however is the even greater scarcity of women coaches in youth sports organizations. The individuals in leadership positions for a majority of youth sports remain male. These early—and for many prolonged—experiences with predominantly male leadership can leave lasting impressions on both boys and girls. Given the historical context of youth sports, perhaps the lopsided numbers of male and female coaches makes sense. Early promoters of organized athletics for kids believed that team competitions would help boys develop the critical manly attributes they would need to contribute to an industrial society. Sports would serve as an introduction into this respectable world, with the coach acting as a boy’s first boss. Why so relatively few women decide to coach youth sports teams or even move into more competitive levels is unclear. After all, participation in youth sports is fairly equitable along gender lines and there are women who move onto being qualified to coach, and many are parents themselves. But youth sport remains for the most part a volunteer endeavor, there still would seem to be a divide of team management tasks along gender lines, men typically coach, and women typically serve as “team moms,” organizing the snack schedule, managing logistics, and collecting money for coaches’ gifts, among other administrative work. I personally find it hard to believe that this phenomena can arise what would call traditional roles. I think the lack of women in coaching is more an issue of the decision makers still being predominantly male and therefore creating the environment where women who might otherwise enjoy leading their child’s athletic team are are confronted with barriers which are placed to keep males in coaching roles. Yet the overwhelming majority of male coaches, even the most sympathetic and youth oriented ones, kind has consequences for boys. Boys are denied the ability to see women operate in leadership roles that males most respect. This has deep implications for our society as boys grow into adulthood, work with, and decide whether to empower women. Exposure to female coaches can pay dividends for boys and for society as a whole. The flip side of course is that for girls, the absence of women coaches means a lack of female role models in powerful leadership positions. And same-sex role models matter, particularly for women. Girls can benefit from same-gender role models more acutely than boys. Female role models act as examples of success and the willingness to succeed even with the gender stereotypes and bias and can motivate girls ( and women ) to strive to fight for their place in sports ( and society). Naturally, the lack of female coaches also signals to girls that coaching is not a career option that’s open to them. If the overwhelming majority of coaches they encounter are men, young women would logically conclude that sports and coaching are better left to the males. More generally, girls who see just males in charge of teams may develop the distorted belief that leadership roles are reserved for men—and that aspiring to lead means adopting a masculine style of governance. To be sure, men don’t just manage with punishment and a strict disciplinary approach any more than women lead with hugs and cute words of encouragement. However males and females do have differing styles of leadership, this is a proven fact. There are exemptions to everything of course, but on the whole, my experience has tended to indicate that that women have a more participative, athlete oriented leadership style, while men tend to adopt a top-down, command and control style. Personally and again, this is in general terms, I've found that male and female coaches differed in their ideals and outlook, with women favoring a more balanced approach to explaining their expectations to athletes, more so than male counterparts who simply expected athletes to follow, "just because I am in charge". If female athletes have only male coaches, they’re apt to experience a kind of leadership that can controvert what feels natural to them and insinuate that they lack the faculties to lead. In my work life, I actually encountered a female manager who would yell and scream and use the phrase " do I have to manage like a man to get anything done?", while I myself, have rarely been the type to yell, so I guess I am not the male manager she might comparing herself to. If female athletes have only male coaches, they could also be apt to disengage with sports altogether. I wonder if the scarcity of female coaches at younger levels helps explain why girls still trail the number of boys who start and continue playing, even though more girls on the whole participate in sports today than ever before. By the mid-teens, girls drop out of sports at twice the rate of boys, just at the time when girls stop speaking up and asserting themselves. And non-participation can also have a health consequence. Girls respond well to female coaches, and good coaches keep kids in sports. Thus, the shortage of female coaches has a potential health consequence for those girls who connect better to fellow females, and who opt out or quit when women coaches are absent. For the majority of young girls and boys who will rarely if ever answer to a female head coach, the absence of women leaders in this slice of their lives may feel inconsequential. It’s just sports, after all. With any luck, boys and girls have ample role models of both genders in other places—at home, in school, at work. But athletics can play a huge role in youth and their development towards adulthood. Sports are a window into society, revealing the larger culture’s values and hang-ups. In this regard, it would be strange to think of sports as any different from business or politics, where many more men than women similarly go on to lead. The good news, well slowly, the faces of coaching in sports are looking a lot less familiar these days. As women are making inroads into sports administrative positions, we are seeing changes. There are now some examples of highly male, testosterone heavy professional sports opening doors of females in the coaching ranks. We haven't seen a women being the head coach YET, but examples like the San Antonio Spurs, Sacramento Kings in the NBA, Arizano Cardinals and San Francisco 49ers in the NFL, Andy Murray having Amelie Mauresmo as his coach, are examples of women breaking through, slowly yes but it is happening. In today's reality, athletes will listen to a coach, any coach that they feel respects them and can make them more successful. We have a long way to go but the truth is that there is a growing acceptance that certain long held stereotypes to explain why women can never be successful coaching at the highest levels are being proven as false and irrelevant. Again from personal experience, without being disrespectful at all to any group of players that I've worked with, I think women are more receptive to coaching than men are. They ask more questions, they are more inquisitive, they want to know the " why" behind the "what". However at the same time, men are easier to manage because they have a more task oriented approach without some of the emotional issues. The issue then because finding the best person, to manage each group based on the personalities, objectives and requirements of each. The more you can relate to athletes, the more you can know them as a person, the better coach you'll be and I think this is one area where women are much better than men. They are typically less driven my ego and more open to wanting to know what makes the athlete tick. A good coach can easily read his or her athletes and find a way to get everyone on board, that is the essence of coaching. At the more competitive levels, there is never one coach by rather a coaching staff, so you don't need a head coach who can manage people, demonstrate and teach technique, motivate players and do the admin work. This can all be shared among members of a coaching staff. I will continue to advocate for women in coaching roles and I will vocally challenge anyone who tells them women can't make good, even great coaches... even for men's sports or teams. I am open to being proven wrong as long as it is based on fact and not on bias or stereotype. If you read my blog regularly, you have probably seen quite a few posts about how important coaching is to me, how it has impacted my life, how much I enjoyed end, and various topics of that nature The truth is that coaching has been a big part of my life for over half of my lifetime, and when I made the decision to walk away and retire from active coaching, like anyone who make a significant change in their life, I wondered what it would like, how would I replace the long hours, would I find something that I could be a passionate about.
The majority of my posts in relation to coaching are from the perspective of how I will missed it or how great everything about it was, but truth be told, like with anything, there were negatives, there were things I will absolutely not miss about coaching and as the title of today's post states, the world didn't end when coaching did. A while back, I posted a piece reflecting on comparing my work with my coaching career, where they intertwine or where they divert, which one better defines. If you want to revisit it, you can find it via this link work-is-what-i-do-coaching-is-who-i-am-or-is-it.html But back to today's post................... For a while there soccer and soccer coaching seemingly ran my life. I spent nearly 3 decades coaching with three organizations, most significantly at the university level with Concordia, if you read my posts regularly, you know all this. For a majority of my coaching career it was pretty close to a year round commitment, practices, games, season planning, scouting recruiting.... that was the soccer requirements. It also meant planning vacations around soccer schedules, eating microwaved meals late in the evening after practices or games, getting home after midnight after games and having to get up early the next morning, missed family dinner, birthday parties, outing with friends, and so much more. Now, let's be clear, that was my choice, it came with the territory of being a high level coach. Then, this summer, it all ended. My time at Concordia came to a close and as I had always planned, once I was done coaching university, I would retire from active coaching. It represents a big lifestyle change for me, however it certainly does not mean I know have no life. Here are a few of the positives changes that retiring from coaching has for me. I don't miss it. That's right, as much as it was a big part of my life, I don't miss coaching. I get back at a decent hour after work, having time to get things done around the house, spend time with my wife, not only do I get to have dinner at a decent hour, I get to enjoy the pleasure of preparing it. I have discovered that I enjoy cooking, I enjoy planning a meal, preparing it and actually eating it in the company of my wife fresh off the stove or out of the oven and not microwaved and reheated. Since retiring, I have only attended one game. It was a game that the Stingers hold annually in memory of a former player who died tragically and raise donations for the Children's Hospital. Just as an aside you can read a little about it via this link stingers.ca/news.php?id=1587 So I attended one game and as I was sitting in the stands watching the Stingers play as a simple spectator for the first time in a long time, I found myself happy to be seeing my former players but not wishing I was on the other side of the field coaching. At different points of this past season, when I do the team was playing, I would look outside and see it raining, or being cold, or thinking how the team was playing in Quebec City and wouldn't be back until 2am and I found myself being happy I didn't have to deal with that. I don't miss the sleepless nights after a tough loss as I replay the game in my mind, second guessing decisions I made and how I might have managed the game differently. I don't miss it, because in my mind I have already dealt with the reality that I was coming to the end of my coaching career. After the initial realization that I would no longer be coaching, I wanted for the disappointment to hit, it didn't. I thought maybe when I read about training camp starting, I would feel nostalgic, I didn't, when the season would start, again , didn't miss it. The earth didn’t open up. Fireballs didn’t rain from the sky. It was almost so uneventful that I was nervously waiting for something to happen around every corner. But it didn’t. It just goes to show how dramatically we can build something up in our mind only to find out it wasn’t nearly that big of a deal in the first place. Did I feel a bit of an identity loss? I did. It would be a lie to say I didn’t, but one thing I didn’t feel was regret. I didn’t regret retiring from coaching because I didn’t want to start over with another team, or organization, but I did feel like something got the better of me, which is a tough pill to swallow. For so long, people identified me as Jorge Sanchez, soccer coach. I would be introduced to people by mutual friends who would say, " Did you know Jorge coaches soccer at Concordia?" or friends, co-workers and acquaintances would ask " So how's the season going?" or " How's the team looking this year ? " and in all cases, I would just respond " I am not coaching anymore, I'm retired." There was a certain weird feeling to hearing myself say the words out loud. Aside from realizing how peaceful I was with walking away from coaching, I realized the over-inflated role sports can take in our lives. Don’t get me wrong! Sports can teach us valuable life lessons , I’ll never dispute that, but we can learn these same life lessons elsewhere as well. Sometimes we build up sports as a life-and-death thing. If we don’t win, we become pretty devastated. Then we get extra nervous before matches because we want to avoid this devastation should we lose. Coaching will always be a huge part of my personality and life experience, you don't spend 27 years doing anything, giving as much time and effort as I gave it and have it not be very important but I know that I can find something else to fill my time. I am not longer defined by being " soccer coach". I used to get meaning from coaching a game. How sad is that? Why couldn’t I get meaning from talking to my parents, or helping my younger brother, or volunteering in my community in other forms. Why can't I now? Coaching is great and it can play a role in many lives but it remains coaching a game. I am not curing disease, saving lives or coming up with some invention that will improve mankind. Yes, you are encouraging and helping others achieve their goals. Now I try to define myself by how much I can help other people by connecting with them, spending time with them, and encouraging them. I define myself by writing. I feel no greater purpose than when someone tells me they felt better after reading something I wrote. And while it seems like I’m bashing sports a lot in this article, I want you all to realize that I do love sports dearly. I have sports to thank for how far I’ve gotten and the constant ambition in my gut. Whether via a few blog posts or during presentations on coaching I have given, I have often shared an anecdote from my first coaching certification course. I had completed my first full year as a head coach, won the provincials and finished 4th at nationals, all with limited coaching experience and absolutely no certification. My club and the provincial federation made it clear that if I wished to continue, I was required to obtain the required certification level for elite women's soccer. Due to me playing background and the success on my first year, I was fast-tracked to be able to complete everything in 1 year. I figured, how much will I really learn?
Well, right away I learned two very important things, first of all, I learned how much I didn't know. Coaching involved so much more than I had ever imagined. This dose of reality has stuck with me ever since and I have always taken steps to improve myself as a coach. Secondly and most importantly for the purpose of today's blog post, I vividly remember one of the very first things the course instructor said; " Without athletes, there is no need for coaches. You are there for them and you will always need to find ways to remain relevant to their needs". More so than the first point, this has always stuck with me. I have always felt an obligation to put athletes first and provide them with an experience that goes beyond results. In almost 30 years of coaching, I have worked with hundreds of athletes at various age groups and levels. Among all these athletes, some probably liked or really like me, some probably didn't very much or at all and a majority most like fell somewhere in between. When I started coaching, I was working with adult women, pretty much in my age category, some older, some younger, most of them being friends of mine. Just as refresher, you can use this link to see why this is the case from a prior post. a-male-coaching-female-soccer-0-less-credible.html Once I move on from coaching at the club level, I went to coach athletes between the ages of 14 and 19 on the provincial teams and national training center and finally for the last 16 years, working at the university level, I worked with student-athletes anywhere from 18 to 23 while each season, I got older and therefore the age gap increased with each passing year. The point ? well, due to changes in the ages, competitive levels of the athletes I worked with, the changes in technology, expectations, and the fact that I aged meant that how I approached my coaching style and interacted with athletes required change and adaptability. It’s always been said that change is inevitable. It’s true in life and it’s especially true in sports. Teams, players, coaches and everything about the sport themselves all go through changes, big and small. With change inevitable, the leaders and coaches who adapt and stay ahead of the curve are the ones that survive and thrive. Every coach who has worked over numerous years has seen countless changes along the way, but what has made them successful is knowing when and how to change with what comes. As the level at which you might coach changes so might the expectations, training regimens and skills levels of the athletes involved change. Like the athletes who play them, the sports themselves have changed over time. It’s been pretty clear as to how the athletes and sports have improved over time, with one needing to look no further than how technology and knowledge gathering is used in sports. Technology has given the coaches who choose to use it an advantage in a number of ways. So when you take all this together, it comes down to one real fact. Can you fight the changes, continue coaching the same way year after year? Taking all these factors into account, it is inevitable that it has an impact on the sport and therefore the reason some coaches continue to have success over time is the fact they’ve changed their own approach, too. This is certainly true for me. The coach that I was when I first started out isn’t the same as who I was. Yes, there is a certain fundamental consistency in terms of my values of style, but I have adapted a number of times over the years. Like with anything else, initially as a new coach coming in there were things I simply hadn't yet experienced. I think I got a little more relaxed in the role and experienced different situations it allowed me face the challenges as they came, I think that helped, not only myself but the athletes, too. Things change in waves,. Sometimes you see them coming and you can plan out how to deal with them and other times, you can't so you just have to hang in there. Having done this a while, I learned it’s about a lot more than that sport and that specific season. It’s about about always being willing to the put the athletes' interests ahead of my own and about what I might teach them that could be applicable for the rest of their lives. Being an athlete centered coach is about coaching with the needs of the athlete foremost in your priorities. It requires that coaches are willing and able to choose a coaching style that is most suitable for their athlete’s needs. Being willing and able to adapt your behavior increases your ability to communicate and build relationships with other people. Coaches with adaptability in sport are both flexible and versatile. Of course, our level of adaptability can be stronger in some situations than others. For example, many coaches tend to be more adaptable with athletes that they know less and are newly joining their team. This is because the coach is usually focused on building rapport with the athlete and is also very focused on trying to work out the most effective way to coach them. As well, many coaches are less adaptable with athletes that have been on their team for some time and have become very familiar with. Adaptability in sport is also compromised when coaches are in a competition environment versus a training environment. As the level of perceived stress increases, thinking times are reduced and instinctual reactions increase. In addition, and what is very interesting is, is that often times people view themselves as more flexible and versatile than they actually are. That’s because we all aspire to those behaviors and we know that being flexible and adaptable are qualities of exceptional coaches. Most people judge themselves on how they intend to act as well as on how they do act. But unfortunately, our actions don’t always match our intentions. Another reason for the gap between coaches ideal versus our actual level of adaptability is that it’s not easy. So if we talk about a coach being both flexible and versatile, what does this mean exactly, To start with, let me pull out standard definitions for each. I googled the definitions for each and using the Merriam-Webster site, chose what I consider the most relevant definitions for each; flexible - characterized by a ready capability to adapt to new, different, or changing requirements versatile - embracing a variety of subjects, fields, or skills So simply put a coach ( or person for that matter ) who is both flexible and versatile has the traits of being able to adapt to new or changing requirements for a variety of skills or areas. Great, so now specifically, how does this reflect on coaching? Well a coach who is flexible will generally have a fairly high level of self confidence in the sense of trusting their own judgement and ability to find solutions even in moments of perceived stress balanced with the ability to accept opinions and practices that are different from their own. These coaches are able to get the best parts from various styles and make it their own. Coaches who never waver from their coaching style may attract like-minded athletes but they will not suit the needs of most teams or squads who have healthy diversity of athletes. Successful coaches have a certain level of empathy with their athletes. It goes beyond just acknowledging the joys and pains of their athletes but feeling a shared investment in the emotional impact of participation in sport. This then ties into always maintaining a high level of respect for the athletes. It is the sincere desire to understand and consider athlete’s choices, commitments and needs in relation to a coach's own. Athlete centered coaching is about meeting the needs of the athlete despite personal preferences. On the other side of the flexibility spectrum are the negative traits that undermine a coach’s adaptability. If you recognize any of these in yourself, try to improve your adaptability by eliminating this negative tendency from your coaching style and behavior. These will include rigidity, competition with your peers and athletes, discontent, being perceived as unapproachable, and having a difficulty with ambiguity. A coach who displays these traits will often have trouble have the flexibility to adapt to changes. So now that covers the traits of a coach who is flexible, who can adapt fairly easily and quickly. So what are the traits that apply to versatility ? A big part of coaching is having the resilience to overcome setbacks, barriers and limited resources. Mainly, it has to do with an emotional strength and firm belief in the process. If you keep on going until you succeed, that’s resilience. Successful coaches all have a clear vision of their process. They know where they are, where they want to get to and how they want to get there. Coaches who have the power to imagine, be creative, and suggest alternatives are going to be more influential than coaches who don’t have this ability. As I got older and the age gap widened between myself and the athletes, one are that I tried to be very aware about and probably struggled the most with, was relating to my athletes. As middle-aged man, it was not always easy to put myself in the shoes of a young adult. This is an absolutely critical skill for every coach – the ability to notice what is going on with your athletes. It can be as simple as noticing when your athletes are getting bored or sensing that now is not the right time to suggest a technical change. It’s knowing when to act and when not to act. It means paying attention to more than your own needs. It means that just because it doesn't make sense to you as an individual, it might be very important to the athletes. One obvious trait required for a coach to have the versatility to adapt quickly and that might seem obvious but isn't always is competence. Competent coaches have a desire to be expert in their sport and in the field of coaching. To a large degree, developing expertise is an attitude. No coach can know everything. Coaching is too multi-faceted. What is important is to know where to obtain information, using all the available tools to get the answers needed. Great coaches find the answers. Great coaches accept that things change and what worked in the past might no longer work. For me, as example, it was the use of video analysis as part of coaching. With the means available, I considered it too labor intensive and yes sometimes boring to pour over game film and try and bring out teaching points whether on our own team play or for that of opponents, and share with the team. Having as technology changed and it became easier, not to mention that the athletes themselves showed a strong desire to have more visual feedback, I took the time to learn a new software platform we had available. It wasn't about what I thought of game film use, but about what was best for the team. This also ties into being open to self correction. This means that you ask for feedback from your athletes on your performance relative to their needs. Too many coaches are defensive or insecure to ask for feedback from the athletes and not many coaches will initiate this review in their domain. Only with feedback can non-productive patterns in your behavior be rectified. Their is no downside to getting feedback from the team, if positive it serves are reinforcement and validation that as a coach you are on the right track, when negative, if you remain open minded, it shows how you can get better. Seems so easy, but the truth is most coaches will have show some of the following negative traits at points during their coaching career; Subjectiveness- the closed minded attitude that who one sees it is how it is, bluntness- simply unfiltered reply to any suggestion, resistance to any form of change, a single-mindedness that the personal needs outweigh those of the group and a certain level of unreasonable risk-taking where the coach jumps to a decision without seeking additional information. Every coach has a bit of all those traits for flexibility and versatility. If it was easy to just incorporate the positives and avoid the negatives, everyone and anyone who wanted to coach, could and would be successful. Developing coaching adaptability allows one to understand how different types of athletes would like to be coached. It means adjusting a coaching style to be more in line with the athletes' preferences. The effectively adaptable coach meets the athlete’s needs and their own. Always remember, without the athletes, the role of the coach is not required. And for the record, most of this post can apply to anyone, in any type of leadership role, it isn't always about coaching sport. until next time................. It's a regular occurrence it seems, a woman working in sports media, whether radio, TV or print, gets criticized , trolled on social media, not based on their knowledge of the sport they are covering, not based on their competence but because of their looks or even more basic for the simple fact they are a female. Twitter responses can be full of criticism, but hardly will it ever be a thoughtful, well worded critique of one's performance. Most criticism will tend to focus on things that are not competence or knowledge based but rather things like voice pitch or hair style.
I follow a number of female sport media personalities via twitter, and not a day goes by when there isn't a negative comment on one of their sports that ranges from simple condescension to insult to outright harassment. In the last few days, there were a few interaction of this nature and as I was looking for a new topic to blog about, it decided to revisits the issue of women in sports media, something I had written about last summer. You can find that post via this link women-working-in-sports-media.html The issue or gender bias, stereotyping or gender based discrimination in the work place is nothing new. Women in any career face struggles that men don’t and women in sports media face an especially steep, uphill battle in a heavily male-dominated industry getting hit with criticism that their male counterparts don’t. It can range anywhere from lower pay for similar work, limited or no access to management or senior administrative positions and of course blatant harassment in the workplace in various forms. It happens in every field but in my humble opinion it would seem more prevalent in the sports media field by the basic nature and perception of the industry, not somehow, females, just for the fact of being females can't possible understand or know enough about sports. So let me get this right, women can be doctors, scientists, engineers, astronauts, and a whole range of other positions but somehow, their gender alone makes them not qualified to know enough about sports. No one is above all criticism, especially those in the media. But people should be criticized for the content of what they say, not for their gender, sexuality or race. Criticizing women in sports media for being women takes away the meaning of any real, thoughtful commentary on their work. Completely removing trolls from Twitter is an impossible game, but if there are more women in sports media, the hateful comments made by these trolls will seem more outlandish. There is power in numbers, and women in sports media deserve all the power they can get. And, it should be noted, that female sports reporters have get to deal with things like online slideshows "20 Sexiest Sports Broadcasters" which although not specified only includes females, in addition to the harassment from fans, the athletes they cover and even their own colleagues. Sports journalism is a uniquely difficult beat for the few women that are lucky enough to get the job. Think back to Carolina Panthers quarterback Cam Newton, being surprised when asked about a defensive coverage scheme that he had faced , coming from a female reporter. He commented how surprising ( or funny ?) to have a woman asked such a sports focused question. This is the example that came to mind as I am typing but these situations happen all the time. As a male, it’s impossible to understand the challenges of navigating the sports media world or in reality any career path as a female. I heard that argument a lot during my 27 years of coaching, that although I was heavily involved in female sports and advocated strongly for the equitable treatment, coverage and respect for female sports, that my being a male made it impossible to fully "get" what it might be like to be a woman in the sports field. Of course, I cannot know what it is like to be harassed based on my gender or looks , to be refused access to a desired job or role because I am a woman, and to FEEL how either of those, or the forms of bias or discrimination can make a woman feel. However, because of my involvement in female sports, because of my interaction with female athletes, coaches and administrators, I have had lots of up close exposure and discussions about what they face or have faced. I have heard other males around me make comments about female athletes I coach or coaches, about other female athletes or about female sports in general. I can share my opinions as an observer with some inside knowledge. I do not pretend to put myself in the place of females who have faced these issues but but sharing I am hoping to show my support. I don't want to write about female sports on the whole but about females in the field of sports media. With the #metoo stories seemingly in the news daily, it is no stretch that this reality is part of the sports media field also. It can range from subtle aggression such as mansplaining and coded language, to inappropriate comments or suggestions right to the more direct romantic advances in professional settings that constitute sexist treatment on the job. In addition, females if sports media face harassment from the general public who more and more seem willing to share " their opinions" on the competence of women working in sport. At the most basic level, when the conversation shifts to women working in sports media, it is quite obvious that the acceptance of and patience with women is far less than their male counterparts. If a woman makes a mistake or mispronounces an athletes’ name, people jump all over her via social media, Rarely is the reaction the same when a man makes the same mistakes. The same can be said for comments about how a woman looks, what she wears, how her hair is done, and of course how she interacts with athletes. For some, it was an accepted part of being a woman working in a male dominating industry. However, if that doesn't fly in other fields, why should it in sports. While their are more women covering sports today, this is simply a case of more numbers because of the increase in mediums which cover sports, specialty all sports TV and radio stations, online streaming, podcasts, etc. Take the time to google information about females working in sports media and you will probably find lots of confirming information that the percentage of women in sports is roughly at the same levels it has been for the last few decades, roughly at 10%. How is it that a recently retired former professional male athlete, can be automatically deemed more competent and viable to work in sports media than a female who completes a degree in sports journalism, does all the right apprenticeships, works her way up through the industry? The issue is not very different than what we see for example in the area of women in coaching roles. The main decision makers remain male. So whether they present barriers to access in the field for the reason of keeping it male dominated or to avoid having to deal with the negative comments, it still comes down to the same issue, male decision makers perpetuating the lack of access to the field. What I find even funnier is that if men who follow sports feel that women can't possibly have sufficient understanding or knowledge to understand male sports because they can't put themselves in the place of male athletes, how is it that males feel that they can easily understand and report on female sports ? So women can understand a sport well enough to play it, say my sport of soccer, a woman can represent her country, play professionally ( another blog topic), be very successful but once retired not be sufficiently knowledgeable to cover it, not female games or male games. I remember watching many of the games from the 2015 World Cup that took place here in Canada ( that is female world cup for the "unknowledgeable" and while all the officials were female ( I blogged about this also), the play by play commentators and studio personalities were predominantly male. So basically a male is better suited to comment on female soccer than a female who actually played the sport. Like in any field, role models play a huge role. When young girls see women in the field of sports media it can serve as a motivation to pursue it as a career. When they see women in the field being harassed and leaving it, well, we know where that leads. While there has been progress with females in sports media, things like locker room access, increase mediums for covering sports etc, the growth in social media and the ease with which the public can interact with public personalities is actually serving as a deterrent. I have no facts to back up this statement, but I am sure for every Sarah Spain, Julie diCaro or Chantal Machabee to name a very few (if you don't know who they are, use google), who speak up for women in sports media , there if exponentially more who give up, tired of facing the bias and harassment. For me, like in coaching, good is good. I enjoy the perspective that a female can bring to sports coverage, whether in play by play, or covering the team beat. I think there are more who feel like me that those who choose to be trolls or criticize, we just need to be willing to show our support and shame the naysayers, not that many of these great female sports personalities needs our help. best ! In sport, we are all taught from an early age to chase winning and to avoid losing at all costs. Over time an association is established between winning and pleasure, and losing and pain. This association develops slowly and so, as a result of both perceived and real experiences, it becomes deeply entrenched. But the effect that this particular measure of success has on our attention in competitive situations, and its consequent impact on the likelihood of achieving success, is worth examining.
Winning generates a great feeling; it provides satisfaction and feedback that we have accomplished something, and it deserves to be celebrated. It can validate the hard work and long hours that athletes and coaches dedicate to practice and preparation. The desire to win is accentuated through ever-changing internal and external influences like rewards, praise, and satisfaction. What commonly exists in parallel, however, is an ingrained fear of losing due to equally significant influences like criticism from coaches and / or parents, negative attention, and a sense humiliation. Whether one is motivated to win or, alternatively, driven by the fear of losing, the point is that either outcome is essentially out of our control. Athletes, coaches, and support staff can do everything in their power to prepare for competition; however, the nature of sport provides too many uncontrollable elements like referees, weather, opposition, field conditions or equipment as examples, that can influence the outcome, for the dominant focus to be on that end state. If athletes develop the ability to maintain focus on controllable aspects of performance, they will most likely perform as desired and in most cases are required, as their focus is directed on the process and not the result along with all the perceived outcomes of winning vs losing. Focusing on performance will also result in athletes experiencing an enhanced ability to withstand inevitable distractions when they do occur. Performance, in any discipline, requires engagement. When we shift attention from the task at hand to something that may, or may not, happen in the future like winning/losing and their potential repercussions, we undermine our ability to perform in the moment. This is when we typically experience momentary lapses in performance due to poor decision making, hindered motor control, or lack of concentration. When our attention shifts to outcome, we also are likely to experience heightened hindering anxiety or, potentially, complacency, both typically having adverse effects on our ability to perform. The ability of an athlete to put the outcome aside and be fully engaged in performance will be a key determinant of success. This is not discrediting winning, or a striving to win; however, it is important to recognize that maintaining focus on performance in the moment or thoughts drifting to winning/losing, are two different things, and involve different motivations. Coaches strive to facilitate athletes’ mindsets that are conducive to optimal performance, which is commonly referred to as "the zone." The most common approach to this is through "psyching" or "pumping " the athletes up, rationalized by the coach’s desire for the athletes to understand the importance of the competition and, therefore, be highly motivated to perform ( or in many coaches speak, WIN). Now, one could argue that only coaches whose teams or athletes don't win often would talk about how winning isn't everything or that the process is more important focusing on the win. I have been accused of that often. Anyone with internet access is free to look at my win-loss record and draw the conclusions they wish. From afar, from the outside, it is easy to assume that when a team isn't winning, it means the coach isn't good, or doing a good job, or that he or she isn't able to motivate the players. Opinions are look a certain body part, everyone has one. However, if you look at the truly successful coaches, those who have had results over time with different teams and athletes, I am sure that you will find those coaches are the type who focus on the process. It is important that key figures in an athlete’s or team's inner circle help to facilitate a mindset that will enable them to perform towards success. There are many articles , book and online resources that talk about this and I will add my personal opinion on the matter. It is important to develop a constructive definition of success. Sport allows for only one winner, which makes important the ability to self-reference success and identify quality performances, as well as areas requiring improvement. There are many instances where we are confronted by opponents who are more skilled than we are. If we perform as well as we can and come up short, is this actually failure? Further, is success accomplished by performing poorly yet still beating a team that we were expected to? The reality of sport is that in every league, there is only one winner or champion at the end. Does this mean that every other team and every other athlete on these teams is be default a loser? I think that success in sport can also be about the peace of mind or sense of accomplishment that is the direct result of self-satisfaction in knowing you did everything within your control to become the best possible version of yourself as an athlete. Buying into this mindset can provide one with a sense of personal control over success and, therefore, a greater sense of autonomy. When athletes, or by extension, teams feel in control, they are more likely to exhibit greater focus and motivation, and diminished hindering anxiety. As a result of a more relaxed, but ready, state of mind, performance will likely be enhanced and, therefore, outcome success is made that much more likely. Competitive sport at pretty much every level comes with a certain level of stress, whether created by internal or external factors. Highly successful athletes have the ability to maintain focus under stress. When an athlete is able to maintain attention on controllable elements, it will likely lead to greater performance. This is due to focus being directed at what needs to be accomplished in order to be successful. This is the paradox of shifting attention away from winning, in order to increase the likelihood of achieving outcome success. It is important that support personnel (coaches, administrator, parents, university recruiters), do not contribute to distractions that inevitably confront the athlete during performance. Identifying process goals to focus on for performance that will contribute to outcome is a commonly used strategy to assist with maintaining focus on the performance. It likely contributes to enhanced performance as focus is directed at the task at hand, but also minimizes the risk of becoming overly anxious or distracted by external elements. One of the foundations of my coaching philosophy is " Focus on the process not the results" . It is something I believe in completely. Therefore, by extension, I consider it crucial to reinforce performance and not outcome. What does this mean concretely ? It is important to think about the language and behaviors coaches and support staff use and reinforce around athletes, as it has a significant influence on how athletes define success and failure, as well as the degree of pressure they experience. A first question following competition focusing on whether the athlete/team won, rather than how they performed, is conducive to athletes developing self-doubt or complacency. Feedback regarding the performance highlights the process as the important element, independent of winning or losing. What coaches typically reinforce during training and after games will influence the mindset of the athletes. Now, let me be very clear, as a person, during my playing days and throughout my coaching career, I hated losing. I thrived ( in some ways I still do) on success. So when I am talking focusing on the process and not the result, I am in no way trying to devalue the importance of winning but rather trying to give athletes the confidence and skill set to take ownership and accountability over their sports success. When it works, it leads to heightened levels of autonomy, confidence, and relaxation, while at the same time increasing the possibilities for success. Such a mindset subsequently allows athletes to perform free of constricting thoughts, thus making success (however defined) that much more likely. As much as a coach should never make winning the ultimate and in some cases only measure, a coach should never send a message that appears to indicate that losing or more importantly no performing up to potential is acceptable. For the majority of us in coaching, I think it is important to create an environment that makes our athletes be accountable for their own success both individually and in the case of team sports, as part of a bigger entity. As Bill Belichick would say " Do your job". A good coach knows who to give the athlete the ability to understand their role and take accountability to do everything within their control to do it at their best. Once the whistle blows and the game starts, hopefully more often than not, the desired outcome will occur. I have previously posted on my blog about parents and youth sport. You can read those posts via these links;
the-over-involved-parent.html when-a-parent-is-the-coach.html However, today I wanted to follow up yesterday's post about getting the best refs for the Women's World Cup and write about the issue of of refs in youth sport and the abuse they face. Picture the scene, a bright sunny summer day, a nice grass pitch with two teams playing a soccer game, sidelines packed with parents cheering on their kids, coaches yelling out instructions to players, the competitive intensity building. One player lunges forward to gain possession of the ball, sending an opponent tumbling to the turf. The referee, isn't sure whether to call a foul, so the play is allowed to go on. The fallen player’s coach thrust his arms skyward, his face contorted with anger and incredulity. His yells at the ref, questioning if he actually knows the rules. This incites the spectators who add their opinions of the non-decision and questioning the referees competency. The usual range of insults arise, ref is playing favorites, needing glasses, is somehow lacking the required knowledge of the rules to be a ref. Of course, players begin feeding off the mounting outrage and start hurling their own criticisms. Now take that scenario and imagine the game being played by kids in the U10 category and refereed by someone 14. In what other sphere can we imagine it acceptable for adults to scream at and insult kids? This situation plays out every weekend across the country. Youth sports officials and administrators contend that ever-escalating verbal abuse is largely to blame for a dwindling referee pool that looks less appealing to young people every year. The fallout is crippling officiating bodies mired in a deeply cutthroat sports culture, one that often holds amateur referees to a professional standard. No, my experience with the situation is limited in sports other than soccer, but when it comes to soccer, player participation numbers continue to rise every year while referee coordinators grapple with stagnation or decline, leaving youth leagues in a constant scramble to fill empty officiating slots. Kids can start earning money as a soccer official at age 13. The money earned for refereeing while not huge is certainly great spending money for a teenager. Yet fewer and fewer teens are signing up. Time constraints are among several reasons for that, but one culprit stands above the rest. The abuse based by youth refs and mostly from adults whether parents or coaches, simply make it seem not worth the hassle. Just like in the youth ranks, the crisis carries into more competition levels and with older kids. and simply boils down to nasty behavior by coaches and parents. Even experienced referees are hanging up their whistles with increasing frequency just as younger referees are growing more and more fed up with verbal abuse that continues to rise. The supply of experienced officials dwindles pretty much at the same rate. Female referees, meanwhile, encounter sexism nearly every time they step onto the field. Now not only are they criticized for on field decisions but the added specter of the fact that somehow being a female , this makes them even less competent to officiate a game. I think club and regional administrators, who in fact are the employers of the referees are equally at fault for the treatment faced by officials. While some club are vigilant about maintaining player and coaching decorum with respect to club administrative rules, many neglect holding their coaches accountable for poor behavior towards officials. And when it comes to parents, no one is really holding them accountable. Some clubs have code of conduct rules for parents but in all my years, rarely have I seen a club really enforce them. The attitudes of players and parents are often a reflection of their coach’s demeanor, so why not just crack down on the coaches displaying bad behavior? One reason is that the reality remains that for youth sports, coaches are volunteering of their time, so clubs worry that if they are too demanding, no one will be willing to volunteer. So what kind of example are coaches who berate officials giving to their young impressionable players? Other culprits are numerous. An explosion of travel leagues coincides with overzealous parents who want to see their kids strive for university scholarships or selection to provincial / national teams. Professional players on television, meanwhile, show kids that feigning injury and berating referees are normal behaviors. I also think that soccer is often hit worse than other sports by parents having a go are refs for the simple reason that even today, with the growth of soccer, too many parents still remain fairly ignorant about many of the rules of the game. So is there any solution ? Cats and dogs. Oil and water. Parents and youth sports officials. Some things just don't mix.Parents and officials never seem to be on the same page. There always seems to be some tension between them. It often seems to parents that the person officiating must be seeing a different game than they are. Every call seems to go against their child's team. Go to just about any youth sports contest and you are bound to hear parents make comments about the official like the following: "Hey, ref, you must be blind!" "Hey, ref. You want to borrow my glasses?" "Ref, are you going out drinking with the other coach after this game?" And when their child's team has lost the game, you will often hear this comment: "It is the ref''s fault we lost the game. If he hadn't made that call, we would have won the game." A cynic would say that refs and parents are the necessary evils of youth sports. Refs are necessary to make sure that one side goes away from the contest feeling their team was cheated, and parents are necessary to provide the players and transport them to and from the game. However, let's keep certain things in perspective. For the majority of youth sports, refs are kids themselves, teenagers usually a few years older than the participants. No matter the sport, there will always be older people on the field to see that the game is played fairly and by the rules. The consistency of training for youth sports refs is sometimes lacking and can be very different from club to club or organization to organization. While the general rule is the higher the level of competitive play, the more likely the officials are trained and paid and a member of an official's organization, the reality is that sometimes given availability, it isn't about having the best trained refs but those willing and available. I mean, can anyone really imagine someone who gets involved in being a referee approaching the game with the intention of being biased or bad? Refs are human, humans make mistakes, that's part of life. In youth sports, these humans with the responsibility of being in control of applying the rules of the game are as I said, still kids and yet some parents who have probably never put themselves out there themselves feel it is ok to criticize. Refereeing in youth sport is an activity for kids, just like participating as an athlete. Using teenagers as refs has advantages to ensure that youth sports can still provide a competitive and rewarding experience to kids and still make it interesting for others to get involved in being refs. Using youth refs has quite a few advantages;
Too often, the parent on the sideline believes that if they attack the character of the referee, the referee will start to call the game for the people who are abusing him. In all of my contact with officials, whether at speaking engagements or in watching them officiate, I have yet to meet a ref who has changed a call because he was emotionally abused by a parent or coach.Indeed, quite the opposite is true: the natural tendency of a ref is to make the call for the less abusive team when the call could go either way. If the abusive parent is trying to influence the ref to make calls for their team they have chosen the wrong way of doing it. The only situation, in my experience, where the abusive strategy works is when the official (oftentimes a young one) becomes intimidated. An intimidated ref is even less likely to call a good game because he or she is afraid of making a mistake. An intimidated ref is likely to not make good calls and the bad taste the experience leaves is very likely to drive him or her from the game, if not the next game, then the one after that, or at the end of the season. I think youth sport has many great things to offer society and kids. When we hear cases of referees being abused ( or coaches but that isn't the topic today), it starts from the fundamental basis that we have lost sight of objectives of youth sport. Furthermore, philosophically, it comes down to simple respect. As adults, parents and coaches need to be good examples of treating others with respect. It really is that simple. The coach sets the tone. When the coach understands the principle of mutual respect, he or she is more likely to be in control of his players and the parents. The parents will take the cues from the coach. If the coach is abusive (and, unfortunately, some are), the parents are likely to follow suit and be abusive. If the coach does not tolerate this behavior, the parents will be better behaved. If the coach goes out of the way to tell the official that he or she appreciates what the official is doing, then the contest will start off on a positive note. The coach should also let the official know before the game starts that the parents will control themselves and not be abusive. That way the official will know that the coach is in control of the sidelines and that he or she wants a positive environment for the young players, as well as for the official. When mutual respect is established, the official will be better able to give his or her best in calling a good and fair contest. If parents are generally supportive of the official and he or she then hears someone question a call from the sidelines, he or she is more likely to pay attention to this type of problem on the field. The parents have gained credibility with the official because they have not complained about every call. Consequently, the official will think more about the last call to determine if it was in error. Now, that right there might be some great wishful thinking. Just telling coaches and parents they must treat refs with respect and expect it to happen won't work. This is something that has always been part of youth sport. I think it really comes down to administrators finding ways to deal with the issue, at least with respect to the behavior of the coaches. Yes, we might lose some coaches, but fact is we are already losing kids working as refs... so which is worse? answer to that for another day. Next summer, we will have the Women's World Cup taking place and like with every major competition, FIFA will send its best officials. Well strike that, FIFA will send their best female officials which not necessarily equate to having the best officials there. Now, before anyone reads that comment as some form of sexist commentary on the quality of female officials or that somehow I am against all female officials at a women's event, stop ! I am fully supportive of having only female officials, in fact I consider it a necessity. It is something that I advocated for during our university national championships.
Having FIFA send all female officials, represents FIFA's effort to improve opportunities for women in the game by mandating all officiating of the games to be overseen by women. Yes is encouraging to see FIFA supporting its manifesto of "the future of football is feminine." But in reality, and not of their own doing, some of these referees, particularly those without high-level national soccer league work, lack the experienced eye needed to handle the increased speed of the attack, aggressive play and competitive intensity inherent to a top level competition like the Women's World Cup. Many would argue FIFA should have hired the best referees, period. Simply put, these were not the 22 best referees in the world. The problem arises from the inconsistencies that exist across different countries in terms of supporting, training and developing female officials. The lack of female officials is in fact not very different from the lack of female coaches. The decisions makers remain mostly male and they control access to coaching and refereeing roles, those doing the training and certification for both remain predominantly make and therefore the barriers in both roles remain. The situation of all female referees is not new or recent, in fact since 1999, the every women's World Cup has featured all female referees. This was a done as a means to ensure that the game's top competition also be a showcase for the games top female officials. One would assume like all top competitions, the expectation has been to ensure top quality standards across all areas of officiating. One would assume the some sort of selection process has taken place at prior competition and will take place ahead of next summer and who like with the men's tournament, will part in a comprehensive program to ensure that they are in peak condition and as well-prepared as possible. However, from which pool of potential officials will these referees be selected? How crucial is getting the best referees for a competition of this level ? The point here isn't to harp on human error, every official is doing their best, and it isn't really even about the gender of the referees. It's about the incredible importance of getting calls right on the game's biggest change. At the World Cup, officials often are the most important people on the field, for their mistakes have the potential to not only change the outcome of the game but also affect the long-term health of soccer in affected countries. With limited resources already being invested by different countries in their women's' national programs, many women's soccer programs rely heavily on FIFA award money to boost year-round training, specifically to help put resources toward Olympic training for those that will qualify since the world cup determines access the games which always take place in the year following a world cup. The women's professional game has not yet grown to a level where women can make a living solely from their playing salaries. In the build up to a world cup, and the year between a World Cup and the Olympics, reality is that most likely a majority of women's soccer players will typically be compensated only with stipends/ grants or endorsements from businesses that sponsor the team. So you can see how every round of advancement at a World Cup has an enormous impact on the overall support levels. If this advancement is affected by a blown call during a game, it can have a huge financial impact for certain teams or players. So taking all that into account, one could argue that if the game truly requires the best ( and by best let's say most experienced ) officials, then why not have male officials ? Well here is the simple answer, because if you use that excuse, what will the motivation be for the governing bodies to invest more resources in training female officials to become better? If you make it ok for males to referee the women's top competition, you create the precedent that there is no need to invest in female refs. As I started earlier in this piece, the issue of having all female officials at the World Cup started in 1999, that is almost two decades. So is it an issue? If it is, how come, knowing the FIFA wants all female officials, why hasn't the problem gotten better ? Here is my perception of the situation. The women's game has grown tremendously in the last 2 or 3 decades worldwide. However, it has not grown consistently across all countries. Officials in certain countries who achieve a certain ranking have the chance to regularly work female games of a certain level while in others they don't. If I go back 20 years, which in the big scheme of things is not a huge amount of time, the measure of a female referee being good was measured in her ability to work a men's game and in contrast for a male referee, having to work a female game was somehow seen as a demotion. Female officials working some 3rd division men's game were somehow seen as being more competent than a woman working a World Cup or women's international. As if somehow, working a men's game was the goal of female refs. The reality is that there are some many more men's game taking place day in day out, so any female official who is deemed "qualified" to work at a men's game has a greater opportunity of working regularly and be default getting a better compensation from refereeing. I think that the issue of women as soccer referees is no different than the discussion about women on coaching or administrative roles with the game of soccer. The role of gender is a popular topic of discussion in soccer and soccer media coverage, but often ignored when talking about referees. This is likely the case because female referees are almost nonexistent at the professional level and exceedingly scarce at the local, university, and national levels. While the number of female and male youth athletes is roughly equal, a significant disparity exists in authoritative roles (referees and coaches). The primary reasons for the scarcity of women in refereeing goes back to the same barriers that exist for coaching, the decision-makers remain primarily male. In addition with the growth of female professional leagues, top drawer competitions and related revenue possibilities, male refs see it as an additional source of income (much like occurs with coaching) so even though they might not see officiating a women's game as ideal, it still allows them to work as a ref and further their development. However, there may even be a much more basic which leads to a lack of interest for females to get into refereeing. First, all referees regardless of gender must start officiating at the youth level. Most coaches are males, and from experience, I can assume that they are more willing to intimidate a female referee than a male referee. Whether female referees are subject to more verbal abuse on the field than male referees, might be hard to accurately access but if true, female referees may feel more intimidated by male coaches and players, and as a result, display less confidence in their calls. Over time, they simply might lose interest and therefore walk away, which at the starting point, decreases the pool of female refs in which to invest for development. With this argument, the scarcity of female referees creates an unfortunate Catch-22: with such a small pool, less women are likely to begin officiating and those that do will may not want to stay with it. If the barrier to progressing remain in place as female officials move up through the ranks, the numbers continue to dwindle and the pools gets further diminished. Therefore, I think that it is imperative to develop strong mentoring programs for female referees, given by accomplished female referees. Ideally, refereeing in soccer would be gender blind. When we could discuss the issue of having the best refs for a game, that would include having a female referee doing a men's game because she is simply the best. To help female officials become the best, I have no issue with female competitions using female officials exclusively. Referees at any level, of any gender are not perfect, mistakes with happen, accept them and move on. Yes, when it is your team involved who faces the consequences, it sucks, but to use the argument that having a better ref ( read a male one) that mistake wouldn't happen is simply to prolong the stereotype that somehow a female ref can't somehow be competent. Asking for all female officials at top level competitions isn't new so instead of resisting the initiative, buy into it and insist on equitable investment of their development. As a top down approach, the top officials in the women's game need to be identified and steps should be taken to ensure they can work regularly at high level game so that when they will arrive at the World Cup they are ready. Perhaps having these officials work within selected countries women's pro leagues through this winter season so that they are working games regularly. I am sure it will ruffle feathers of local officials ( read male one mostly) who might lose out on games and therefore pay but if the decision makers are truly serious about developing female officials, they need to use every possible avenue and not just rely of each country to develop their own, because as we see with investment in national teams, there remains a huge disparity. I will however highlight one exception for the short term for using female officials exclusively. This summer's Men's World Cup saw the introduction of VAR . video assistant referee. This technology is being rolled out at various levels of soccer. If the goal for a World Cup is to ensure the right calls are being made regardless of gender then if VAR is good enough for the men's competition, it is right for the women. So far, the argument for not using VAR next summer is that there may not be sufficient time for women to be trained in the use of VAR. If VAR is now considered an integral part of the game, then not using it for the highest level of competition on the women's side is simply another type of gender in equity. If for next summer that means using the men already trained in the use of VAR, then so be it. After all, the main goal is to make sure that games are won or lost on the field by the play of the teams and determined by a missed or wrong call. I don't consider it inconsistent to continue wanting all female on field crews and males working the VAR. It respect the ideal if promoting females in officiating and getting the calls right. A new town, a new school and having to make new friends. How many times have I gone through this in my life? I really thought my dad was settled in his job and finally I would be able to enjoy some stability but sure enough, an opportunity came up and dad couldn't resist, so here I am again having to start all over.
I slowly shuffle towards school, lost in my thoughts, thinking about the friends I had to leave. I wonder if this town has a soccer team. Does my school? The move happened so fast that I didn't even get the chance to do some research. I haven't really lived in any one place long enough to make any super close friends and for most people that come in contact with me, I am considered to be a loner who walks around seemingly in my own little bubble. The only place, I really feel able to express myself fully is on the pitch. Get my on the field, give my a ball and I am come alive. Soccer is the one place I seem to be able to make a connection with others easily. Man, I hope there is a team here I can play one. My saving grace has always been soccer, it's how my dad and I relate and how I can deal with the constant moving. I've been told I have the potential to play in university and maybe even on the national team but it's been hard to get noticed since I've never stayed anywhere long enough to show my skills to scouts. As has become my habit, I head towards my first day at the new school really early. Nothing like getting there with time to roam the campus and get my bearings. With some luck I might run into some fellow students and start the process of trying to make new friends. Will they like me ? Will I like them ? What will the teachers be like? I pull out my schedule, learning the classes and their room numbers, trying to commit the teachers' names to memory. I know I am supposed to check in at the office and they will probably give me some sort of tour and briefing but I want to be ready. I am lost in my thoughts... it takes everything to put one foot in front of the other. No matter how many times I have gone through this routine, I always dread it. A first day that will be filled with a bunch of other firsts. " Can you pass the ball back please ?" Much to my surprise, I had arrived at school and I was standing beside the best soccer field I have ever seen. There are a bunch of guys standing there, hands on hips, staring at me, probably wondering who is this person. " Hey you, can you please pass us the ball ? " I seek out the owner of the voice and it's obviously the unofficial leader of group. You know, every group has one, that guy that everyone else defers to, usually the smartest, funniest or most athletic one that the rest of the group sort of all comes to agree is the leader. Sure enough, there was a soccer ball that had rolled up beside me and was just there, waiting to be kicked. This is it, my chance to make a first impression via the sport I live and no way I can screw this up. I feel a brief moment of insecurity, wondering if despite countless hours training and playing, if I try and send the ball back, I am somehow going to shank it in the wrong direction or scuff it and see the ball not even make it half way back. Who am I kidding, I got this and easily send a perfectly weighted , lofted pass that sails right into the group, nicely hit with my left, with just enough back spin to deaden the ball as it hits the turf. With a quick thanks and a thumps up from the leader, the group breaks up into two teams and gets back to playing. Before too long, all the familiar sights and sounds of the game talk hold, the passing, trash-talking, players barking out directions to each other, that one guy who things he is Messi attempting to dribble through everyone, that is until some gets fed up and fouls him. This is soccer at its best. when even the simplest of pick up games takes on the appearance of World Cup final. I find myself staring, fixed in place, taking in the action as only a true fan of the game can. Everything around me is a blur except for the 110x60 patch of turf and the soccer action taking place. I guess I get caught up in the moment and lose track of time and before I know it, the leader stops running and yells out; "Hey you, you play soccer? You any good ?" What to answer to this ? How can I know if these guys are any good? I am quite good if I'm honest, better than most to be really honest but it's all relative. If over sell it, I'll look like I am full of it, if I undersell it, it will look like I lack confidence. If these guys go to my school and play on the school team, this is my chance to make a good impression. How I answer and how I back it up with my play could determine my chances of fitting in. Being too slow to answer back, the leader walks over while his buddies continue to play. " Hey, so, do you play soccer? We are a player short to make even teams if you're interested" " Yeah, I play soccer, I can hold my own" " So come one, join the game, school starts soon and we don't have much time" With these words and a wave of the hand, he sprints back to the field and rejoins the game. It's decided I guess, I'm going to join in. I head to the sidelines, put down my backpack, pull out my cleats ( they are always with me) and feel lucky I choose to dress in my customary track pants and sweat top. I change into the cleats, do up the laces and go through a quick stretch and warm up routine. I continue to watch the game and now from a close vantage point, I realize these guys are pretty good. It's just a pick up game but there is tactical structure, quality technical skills and its highly competitive. I gingerly step on the field, not sure which team I am to join or which position I might be asked to play. The game stops as everyone stares at me, this is it, the moment of truth that can determine my soccer future is this new town and school. The leader steps up to me and says; You're going to be me on our team. Can you play midfield? Oh and my name is Paul by the way. I meekly reply that I can in fact play midfield and reach out for a handshake which instead turns into a quick hand-slap and fist bump. I can't believe how easy this is. No fuss, no muss, few words are spoken and it's all about the soccer. Can making friends really be this easy? Of all the times I have started over, it's never happened this fast. There is none of the usual questioning or doubts, just the assumption that I know how to play soccer and off we go. I take up my spot on the field and the game restarts. I'm tentative at first, it's been a while since I've played and want to make sure my first chance to touch the ball with be a good one. There's a quick flow to the game, the ball is zipping around, movement of the ball is as good as any of the competitive teams I have played with. A pass is played into the area and I know I can get there to intercept. I step in ready for contact but my opponents first touch is terrible and the ball shoots up and catches me squarely in the face. My visions blurs, nose feels numb and everyone stops playing as if expecting me to burst out in tears. "I'm fine, it's just a ball in the face, happens all the time. Let's go!" The game restarts and finally I get some touches on the ball. I don't want to make any glaring mistakes so I keep it simply. A few touches and off goes the pass. Control, turn and play the ball forward. Chest trap, play the ball out of my feet and I hit a great cross field pass to a sprinting teammate down the wing. Now I am finding my rhythm . I'm really getting into the game, I start demanding more of the ball, showing for my teammates, screaming for the ball to be be passed to me. I think they are starting to see I know how to play this game but I'm still holding back a bit. My passing range extends, left foot, right foot, chip over the top, driven through balls. I can do it all with ease, This is me. This is what I do. My team gets a good spell of possession now, the ball is moving quickly around as we attempt to break down the defensive block. I'm playing quickly, 1 touch , 2 touch pass the ball. It comes back to me and I sense time and space has opened up. I take a quick touch, put my head down, step over , step over, beat the defender of the dribble and hit a great strike, 30 yards straight into the top corner of the net. I have arrived and made my statement. I can play this game. As my team walks back towards our half for the kick off, Paul strolls up alongside and blurts out " You're really good for a girl!" |
AuthorAfter many years of coaching at various levels and with different teams, I thought I would share some of my experiences and thoughts about coaching. Archives
January 2023
Categories
All
|