The essence of the soccer culture is that soccer is the “player’s game”. What this means is that, once the game is underway, the players are expected to make their own decisions as to the right thing to do in any situation, without interference from coaches or spectators. Of course, in a professional game, there are plenty of spectators with an opinion but their input is thankfully lost in the noise of the crowd.
Sideline coaching varies at each level of course. The message that a coach needs or wants to share with individual players or the team as a whole is as different as the experience and abilities of the players at different age groups and competitive levels. In a youth soccer game with only a handful of spectators, loudly-voiced opinions and “suggestions” are all too easily heard. Anyone who has been involved with youth soccer has stories about the over-involved parent who feels that he or she, while not willing to coach, feels that they have an opinion that is worthy of being considered. While soccer has grown and continues to grow in North America, there are still certain parts of the soccer culture which remain somewhat not understood than those in other sports, in which the coach is effectively a part of the team, controlling plays, using a timeout to stop the other team’s momentum, instructing a player to run or stay on base, calling for line changes and so on. Irrespective of whether you think this is good or bad, it is not the soccer way. Once the whistle blows there are no practical mechanisms provided by the laws of the game for a coach to influence the outcome. The players make individual decisions, good or bad, and collectively have to react as a team to the strategy and tactics of the their opponent. They learn to do this in two ways, first at practices, where the coach does have control, and second and, ultimately more importantly, by experience at the games. This is the origin of the soccer coaching adage “the game is the teacher”. It takes a lot of games to get the experience, but there really is no short cut, much as coaches might wish there were! Many coaches find this situation frustrating, especially if they also coach a sport in which they do have more control. A common reaction is for the coach to become a “shouter”. In the extreme this takes the form of a continuous barrage of shouted verbal instructions to the players, which is essentially an attempt by the coach to “control” the game. At any game with a noisy crowd this doesn’t work, of course, although some coaches develop remarkably loud voices trying. This style of coaching at the game is sometimes also referred to as “micro-coaching” so basically the sports equivalent of micro-management. I have also used the term PlayStation coaching to reflect those coaches who somehow think all their players are controllable from a distance and can be guided through every step of the game. The "Laws of the Game" for soccer actually have a section related to the manner in which coaches can interact with players during games. FIFA law states that a “coach may convey tactical instructions to his players during the match and must return to his position immediately after giving these instructions. The coach and the other officials must remain within the confines of the technical area, where such an area is provided, and they must behave in a responsible manner”.. The spirit of the FIFA law is that coaches convey only occasional instructions to players and these are limited to “tactical”, that is “off the ball” instructions. The expectation is that coaches use the game to observe their players in action and use what they see as feedback into the practice situation. Let’s start by admitting that many veteran coaches, including myself, have at some points throughout their careers covering the entire spectrum from micro-coaching to being an observer and cheerleader at games. We’re not perfect either. Sometimes we lapse into bad habits under stress because we’re human. But we believe in the soccer culture and strive always to be good role models. In this section I will discuss some of the issues surrounding micro-coaching in more detail and explode some myths. To begin with, let's be very frank, no matter how clear and explicit your shouted instructions might be, the players will rarely be able to hear let alone understand what they are being told. It’s hard to accept this if you have never played a team sport. The truth is that, when concentrating on handling the ball, it is impossible to process instructions. Players shut out extraneous inputs; all they hear is a general background noise. Of course, if they are close and you shout really, really loud, they’ll hear you, but in doing so they will probably lose focus on what they are doing and lose the ball. Players on the field like being directed. Even if they do, (from experience, my interaction with athletes I have coached leads me to believe that it stresses them more than it helps), it isn’t helping them make their own decisions, and they’ll never become good soccer players if they don’t. Some coaches justify their behavior on the grounds that the kids really need the instructions and that it helps them become better players. It’s possible that this could be true but at what cost? Again, it’s hard to appreciate this if you haven’t played a sport with a “coach”, but most adults would find it irritating and unsettling to be the subject of constant verbal instructions. Kids spend their whole lives being told what to do by adults. Historically they learned to play sports without adult involvement. Times have changed so that organized sports are now the norm, for better or worse, but that doesn’t give adults the right to take over their games. It’s the players’ game. Ask around and most coaches that are vocal in their coaching from the sidelines will reply that they are simply encouraging their players and giving them options and positive reinforcement. I hear this a lot and I’m sure some coaches really believe it. However, if you’re a real shouter, you will inevitably get seriously involved in what’s happening out there on the field. Eventually when something goes wrong, you’ll let your guard slip and some not-quite-positive remark will emerge, because it’s practically impossible to keep the brain properly engaged when in verbal torrent mode. As an example, what do you think is the impact on your players of a shout of “Wake up, defense!” immediately after a goal is scored? I would suggest to you that this belittles the players and simply expresses the coach’s dissatisfaction with their play. It is not positive coaching and it is unlikely to improve performance on the field. Other tell-tale phrases are those containing “you should have…” or “you need to…”. While well intentioned, these remarks will be perceived as criticism by the players. I don’t know too many adults who respond well to public criticism, let alone kids. Just remember, the players only “need” to have fun. Finally, panic shouts of “Get it out of there!”, “Shoot!”, “Clear it!” just overload the players with noise. They rarely have any useful effect, except to make players feel more nervous and unsure of themselves. Great performances are not made in a mental state of panic. Most importantly, My experience is that listening to a shouter coach, however well intentioned he/she is, just gets plain annoying after a while. It certainly spoils my enjoyment of the game. Spectators (parents) come to watch their children play, not to listen to the coach. Many coaches will tell you that being vocal on the sidelines shows everyone, the players, the parents, the opponents etc that as a coach, they are into the game, that they are passionate and involved. Most importantly, many inexperienced coaches might say that it shows the parents that their kids are being coached. Many parents are equally unaware of the soccer culture, and simply transfer their expectations from other sports. Others are themselves intimidated by a coach who is a shouter. Some, seeing progress in their child’s soccer development, may put up with the shouting because “my child is learning a lot this season”. I would challenge anybody who can prove to me that constant verbal coaching from the sideline has any real impact on the continued developed of any player. Many coaches will also tell you that being vocal in questioning referees calls sends a message to the team that the coach has their backs. Micro-coaching often goes hand-in-hand with public complaining about the refereeing. Again, if you are providing running commentary to every aspect of the game, you are going to react deeply to every call, just as if you were actually out there on the field, and if you’re verbalizing, you’ll find it very hard not to say something critical. There is no margin for discussion on this one: public complaining about the refereeing is not acceptable, period. Coaches need to lead by example and constantly complaining about the refereeing doesn't tell the players that the coach has their backs, it says it is ok to complain about every call, not to mention might shift accountability when the game isn't going well. How many times have coaches complained that they ref stole the game from them? I've probably said it myself but as far as I know, refs don't score goals or give away the ball. A lot of micro-coaching has its roots in the coach being too personally invested in the success of the team. This is dangerous ground that can lead to some truly bad behavior by coaches. And, yes, it happens every season. Sometimes a coach is trying to make up for his or her failed success in sports by playing vicariously through the team. Other times the drive to win (at all costs) is just too deeply embedded in his or her personality. Other times the coach feels inadequate if the team isn’t successful and attempts to remedy this by micro-coaching. If any of these resonate with you, just remember “it’s for the kids”. You are a coach and in a leadership position, not a player. So, all that being said, does it mean that I think coaches should be completely silent at games ? No! The opposite extreme of a shouter is the truly silent coach, which is easily mistaken for indifference. Players do like to be praised when they do well. There are plenty of opportunities at a game to provide praise and positive encouragement to your players. It’s also perfectly ok to communicate tactical suggestions just so long as you don’t do it continuously. For example, instructions to your defense to move up with play, and occasional positional advice. What you should not do is try to teach positional play at a game by constant instruction. In my coaching career, especially with older, more experienced players, I often tried to have a series or verbal cues that I could give out during games. These were worked on during practice, as we developed our tactical play and game plans. It could be something as simple as saying " high pressure". Based on what we might have worked on in training, each player would understand how role as to what was required for the team to put on high pressure. I didn't yell out instructions to each individual player as to what to do in each situation. The verbal cue gave a very clear message to the entire team for our tactical set up in that moment. However, at the youth level, the most important thing should be about creating a positive environment where the athletes can improve, learn about the game and most importantly develop the ability to make decisions in the most intense competitive moments, on their own and based on work done in training. If you are a coach and while reading this you recognized some of your own behavior at games, try to examine your reasons for micro-coaching. Hopefully some of the arguments above will persuade you that there is another way that will achieve the same results and, in the process, let the kids play their game in as natural a way as possible.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
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
|