I listened to the recent ‘Training Ground Guru podcast’ with Brian Ashton last week where he shared his views and experiences on coaching – some wonderful stuff! Working alongside Brian in the period between ‘98 and ‘02 when he coached the England Rugby senior team, I was fortunate enough to see his work at close hand and can testify absolutely to the impact his approach had. Nineteen years later and with a lot more experiences gained, I don’t necessarily agree with everything Brian says, particularly on specialist coaching, but on his core messages I’m all in. Creating game understanding and player ownership through situational coaching and the imperative of designing problem solving environments driven by two-way questioning not one-way telling remain cornerstones of the best coaches.
So why, with such important messages delivered so eloquently, and with Brian engaged in mentoring and helping develop Academy coaches in football did I finish the podcast feeling more downbeat than positive?
Despite how long Brian (and others) have been preaching these messages, in many quarters this approach is still seen as innovative, radical or even worse, irrelevant by many at the top levels of football. Not everywhere, not at every level, not that progress hasn’t been made, but still a majority thinking “it’s different with the first team”, or “it won’t work in football”.
What do you know?
I’ve never coached at the top level of football and I’m very aware that my opinion, and similar ones from those who haven’t “done it” at the highest level of the game, are so easily dismissed by those comfortable with the status quo or who have not been presented with alternatives. So what perspective can I bring?
I’ve been pretty fortunate over 30 years in elite sport, to have been influenced by, worked with and spent time with an incredible array of coaching talent, allowing me a fairly unique comparative perspective. At Loughborough University in the late ‘80s and early 90’s I was taught by Rod Thorpe and Dave Bunker, authors of the seminal pedagogical work “Teaching Games for Understanding”, which influenced generations of coaches. Alongside Clive Woodward, Phil Larder, Andy Robinson, Dave Alred, Simon Hardy, and other ex-Loughborough and other educational environment alumni I watched, learnt and contributed to a team who completely understood the imperative of an adult-adult learning dynamic in creating winning teams and in making sure the player perspective was always encouraged and valued . I’ve been told by senior coaches in football that “rugby players are different”, which they explained as meaning they were “better educated and more articulate”, and that was why that approach could work. Really?! So how did a similar expectation of player involvement and ownership thrive under the brilliant Tony Smith at Leeds Rhinos or continues to do so at Hawthorn AFL with Alistair Clarkson, or Melbourne Storm with Craig Bellamy? Don’t these sports have players with remarkably similar educational and economic backgrounds to football? I personally find the comment demeaning to players as well as narrow minded. To those who say “footballers are different” I might confidently reply, “how do you know?”. If a coach has never worked outside the game, never spent real time working with other athletes and coaches in other sports, isn’t their myopia the root of the problem?
I’ve had the privilege to work with international rugby players such as Jonny Wilkinson, Will Greenwood, Lawrence Dallaglio as well as footballers such as Harry Kane, Marcus Rashford and Wayne Rooney at international level. Those, and many other experiences, allow me to juxtapose footballers with their peers from other sports and generations. Footballers are no different at all ; they have the same qualities and capabilities of any of the best of the rugby generation serially identified as great leaders. What’s different is what is expected of them, and what skills they have been allowed to develop to contribute and take ownership.
The senior team paradox
We don’t have to look far to see there are still many storied coaches installed at the front of classroom style rooms of folded-armed players, talking at them whilst pointing at huge LED screens and thinking that asking “are there any questions?” is the same as asking questions. Too many so-called analysts spending countless hours “telestrating” clips for the aforementioned presentations with production values that put Sky Sports to shame because they’ve convinced themselves that the “revolving spotlight” or another clever graphics tool is the critical factor to unlock understanding.
Reference, Amazon, Spurs : All or Nothing
Too few coaches (Pep Guardiola excluded) willing to code their own game clips, feeling it demeans them to do so. Fewer still who would delegate this task or that of leading a debrief or a pre-training meeting to players in order to give them leadership responsibility, to help check their understanding, and to mix the mode of delivery. Too many sessions beginning with rondos or boxes because “the players like it” or “if it’s good enough for Barcelona it must be for us”. A huge amount of standard drills, of 5v5s or 6v6s – of repeating the same stuff over and over, instead of creating situations which demand players find different solutions, and involving players in analysing why it worked or didn’t work. An overriding emphasis on a great session being one where there were no errors, instead of recognising that those are often the sessions where least was learnt.
An abundance of owners, chairmen and directors of football who maintain that “winning coaching” is different miss the point that the first team should represent the pinnacle of what we expect in terms of coaching, learning and player ownership. Instead the Academy often shows more evolved behaviours than the first team. The big paradox is that many Academy coaches have embraced a philosophy which gives players more responsibility and ownership – but what’s the point if these skills they develop aren’t valued when they reach the first team?
Is football different?
Is it because football is different or because footballers are different, and what works elsewhere won’t work here? Unequivocally from my experience I can say it isn’t. What is, however, much more prevalent in top level football than perhaps any other sport, is the “cult of the coach”. This idea, driven by the media, but unchallenged by many in the game, that it’s the coach or manager who is all important. These unicorn style leaders (the gaffer!) bring with them the identity of the “knowledge-giver”, whose job it is to pass down precious information (that only they possess) to players in a hierarchical, parent-child style relationship. Whilst some talk of the importance of engaging players, their behaviours betray them and severely limit the opportunities for players to fully contribute to driving performance. At its worst, this approach firmly establishes the dynamic as one where, with the “best coaching methodologies in the world”, wins can largely be explained by coaching brilliance but losses solely attributed to faults by the players.
The best do it differently
I’m further encouraged as I read, listen to and observe leaders of the very best senior teams in the world who are doing it differently. Differently by expecting the most senior players to role-model leadership, ownership and engagement behaviours to their fullest extent. Not wanting them to have an opinion, but expecting it ; not encouraging them to take part in a debrief but allow them to lead it ; not criticising players for not leading in games, but then standing on the side directing them. Coaches like Steve Kerr and Steve Hansen seem to me to be educators at heart who understand that to grow capability in players, you must first expect, but also be humble enough to subsume yourself to give space for the player to take responsibility and ownership. They understand that to take over, to have all the answers, is to stunt learning and development. Great coaches like these understand the need for flexibility in coaching approach, albeit with a default setting much biased towards supporting, encouraging and mentoring styles, which encourage ownership and partnership rather than directing, which encourages the opposite.
It might appear that much of this article is a criticism of football coaches ; it is not intended to be so. There are many football coaches, often working in so-called development environments, who already embrace the approaches summarised here and possess the ability to excel at senior team level. However, the vast majority are held back by a glass ceiling which says “winning coaching is different”, preventing them from getting the chance to operate at senior level thereby maintaining the illusion of the iconoclastic manager and their disproportionate pay.
And it is an illusion. For while the very best coaches do possess charisma and knowledge, they also have humility and method, reflection and refinement. They aren’t fearful of players’ opinions, of being confronted by a question they don’t have an answer for, or coaching beyond their own ability. They embrace and encourage the player perspective, treat player input as from peers not subordinates and recognise the transformational impact true player ownership can have on team performance.
Democratising coaching
It’s long overdue that senior football recognises the value present in understanding and owning the process of coaching as opposed to the illusory value of the coach as an icon. Democratising coaching through a transparent methodology, with player ownership at its heart, as many other sports have done is a powerful but under-valued performance driver. Football isn’t different, footballers aren’t either.
I know there are some coaches already doing this, but there are many more who claim to be but are doing nothing of the sort, and who still genuinely believe that winning demands a different approach. However, I would take less well-known coaches such as Steve Cooper, Casey Stoney, Aaron Danks, Geraint Twose and Lee Skyrme every time over many of the so called big names out there. They understand the power in these methods and continue to innovate and drive progress in this often overlooked but critically influential area of winning performance.