There is a better way – Part 3: I don’t notice you
In the second phase of the game, only a minute or so in, one of the players successfully bumped off the attempted tackle of an opponent. The attacking player whooped so loudly you could hear him a mile away. The celebration continued for another minute. This is a real live, 2017 example, in a state level talent identified player, playing club sport.
This player’s team lost that game by about 40 points.
This was not, and is not an isolated incident. In the team this young athlete plays in, more celebration is given to individual achievement that team success, although in fairness they have no team success. Or perhaps because of the allowed behavior they have no team success.
There was a time, and still is in the winners in the world of team sports, when the scoreboard did all the talking. However this changed with the focus on individual achievement as a form of performance measurement. The collation and distribution of individual’s player game statistics in team sports may have been the turning point.
In Australian team sports, this change towards a greater focus on individual player game stats became apparent in the late 1990s. In American it would have been a decade or so earlier.
What has been the impact of this increased focus on individual player game statistics on team performance? Suffice to say, any team that fails to control and keep in context this aspect of the game will not be a championship team.
The aim of this article is to provide an introductory insight for coaches into developing the most fundamental key to success in team sports.
The first step
The fundamental first step in determining tactics in team sports is the decision to commit to playing as a team. Now I understand this sounds so obvious you may wonder why I bother mentioning it. I wish I didn’t have to. However the reality of my observations is that tragically this fundamental concept has become lost in coaching practice.
The first step is to decide, as a coach or player, where your commitment to this concept. Do you plan to embrace and execute team first tactics, or individual first tactics?
Now it’s one thing for a player to choose to prioritize their individual game statistics over the team outcome. You could expect that in a world where selfishness and instant gratification are growing trends. However players should not be dictating team culture. Yes, many would like to, and many do attempt to. In the ideal world the team culture is the responsibility of the coach. So what happens to a team where the coach fails to negatively reinforce selfish behavior, or worse, promotes selfish behavior by act or omission? Lack of team success, epidemic in team sport globally.
To clarify the values of the coach in the example where the team prioritizes the individual ‘big hits’, a few weeks after the incident described in the opening paragraph, the coach was heard to say in the half-time speech – at time the team was down about 33-5:
“Now its time to do well as individuals.”
That was this coach’s solution to success in team sport, after giving up on their best efforts team tactics (which were really an extremely sub-standard team approach, more an individual approach pretending to be team). So whilst the concept of team-based tactic as the first step sounds obvious, it apparently is not to what I suggest is the majority of coaches.
The fact that the team in this case study was a losing outfit (finishing in the bottom half of the ladder) is a coaching failure, not a player failure. Yes, we could blame the player/s, however the athletes relying on the wisdom of their elders, their coaches.
The second step
The second step in team-first tactics is to have the ability to identify characteristics of team play, and to positively reinforce them.
Let’s assume a coach at least in theory embraces team-based values. Do they have the skill-set to identify the desired characteristics? We actually need to take it back even one step further – do they even know from a left-brain recall perspective the top five to ten characteristics of team based values tactically speaking? Without at first a theoretical understanding, there is no chance of developing unconscious competence!
The young male athlete came off the basketball court hoping for some encouraging words from his coach in the post game debrief. What he got was the comment
“I don’t notice you out there on the court.”
Wow! Without going into the power of words as it relates to coaching and empowering athletes, this comment revealed a lot about the coach.
So the basketball coach that told the young player that they didn’t notice them out there was, I suggest, another coach doomed for the scrap heap of non-fulfillment, because they were looking at the individual stats, not the scoreboard,
Absolutely, the player’s individual game statistics were not setting the world on fire. But what if the player was one of the dying breed of players whose primary focus was on put team before individual, to do things to to enhance team success as measured on the scoreboard at the expense of looking good individually?
Let me help the coach out with this insight into understanding how players impact the momentum of the game and the scoreboard, irrespective of their individual players statistics. I analyzed three games played by this basketball team in question prior to this disempowering yet enlightening comment by the coach. This it as a great example of a teaching opportunity in the area of coach education, specifically tactical development!
I divided all periods of play into periods of when the player chastised for not being ‘noticeable’ was on the court, and when this player was off the courts. Let’s give this player the code name ‘Player H’. Player H was averaging about 45-50% court time, never starting a game.
Total periods | Win | Loss | Draw | |
H OFF | 12 | 1 | 9 | 2 |
Averages | 8% | 75% | 17% | |
Av Points Differential | 2 | -5 | 0 | |
H ON | 11 | 4 | 5 | 2 |
Averages | 36% | 45% | 18% | |
Av Points Differential | 3.25 | -3% | 0 |
There were 11 periods of play over three game when Player H was ON the court, and 12 periods of play over these three games when Player H was OFF the court. Note this team has not won a game, trial or regular season. The season is 7 games long.
So what do the TEAM stats – as measured by the scoreboard – tell us about Player H’s contribution?
- When Player H is ON the court, 36% (4) of the playing periods are won by his team. When player H is OFF the court, 8% (1) of the playing periods are won by his team.
- When Player H is ON the court 45% (5) of the playing periods are lost by his team, compared to 75% (9) when Player H is OFF the court.
- There is no statistical difference in relation to drawn points periods when Player H is ON (17%) or OFF (18%) the court.
- The average wining margin of playing periods won when Player H is ON the court is 3.25, compared to the average winning margin of 2 when Player H is off the court.
- The average losing margin of players periods lost when Player H is ON the court is -3 and the average losing margin for lost playing periods when Player H is OFF the court is -5.
So the court didn’t notice Player H when he was on the court? This is a classic example of coaches failing to understand the impact individual players have on TEAM performance. Failing to understand how individual players contribute to team success is a guarantee to fail as a coach in team sports. Failing to reinforce a TEAM based culture and tactics. And failing on the scoreboard as well.
Additionally, what impact did these words from the coach have on the player? The athletes unsolicited comment:
“With a statement like that, I really want to play for that coach….”
Yes, that was sarcasm used by the young athlete. Cumulatively, the comment contributed to the young athlete questioning whether to continue playing that sport for that institution. How does this help anyone? Not the player, not the institution represented, not the sport. Oh, and not the coach.
So what do you think Coach? Has this helped you notice the ‘Player H’s’ when they are on the court now?
The third step
The third step is to possess the coaching skill-set (as a coach) or influence (as a player) to successfully create this tactical foundation and culture.
When I am coaching new teams and I see this behavior I call it out for what it is – selfish; and provide instant negative reinforcement for it. It is an epidemic in sport that makes it so easy to win in team sports for those coaches and team who understands the value of a TEAM first culture, and have the courage and skillset to implement it.
Let’s assume in the case study presented at the start of this article the coach was committed to team-value based tactics (which we know is not correct). What should or could they have done about this display of individual-centric values by this young athlete?
One solution would have been to ‘drag’ (take off the field, counsel) the player immediately and given them a solid insight into why that behavior is unacceptable and inappropriate. That is, if it had to get that far. These values should have been clarified in the first few weeks of a new team assembling, during training. The clarification of team values is arguably THE MOST IMPORTANT act a coach can do to establish success.
So how can you readily identify TEAM based cultures and tactics vs individual-centric team cultures and tactics? Simply watch when a player passes the ball –did the player pass the ball as a first option, or as a last option, when they have exhausted all their own options?
Therefore how to do you change team tactics to a team-value based culture? Conduct drills and provide positive reinforcement verbally to unselfish play, where the player’s decision making reflects the internal question of ‘what would be best for the team?’
I understand that the greatest challenge for any coach seeking to implement this is that the team performance may suffer in the learning phase. This short term loss will be more than off-set by the long term rewards for having a team-value tactical culture.
In my experience implementing this tactical strategy, the key is initially to reward to process (e.g. of passing as the first option, not the last option) over the outcome. Yes, the parents on the side of the field will be critical because their ‘Young Johnny’ could have scored had he been selfish, or the team could have ‘won today’ had he been selfish. Perhaps the pass was dropped, and the score did not occur. Or perhaps the team lost. What astounds me is all the lip service given to ‘long-term athlete development’. This concept is NOT JUST RELEVANT to physical development (although I suggest most coaches who talk about this fail to develop this physical anyway but that is another discussion) – it also relates to technical (skill), tactical (tactics) and psychological development. Not just also – probably more importantly!
Historic influences on this individual-centric team value
So where did this player driven and coach accepted inappropriate behaviors evolve? In this discussion, we will look beyond the obvious human trait temptation of selfishness and meeting individual needs.
In Australian team sports, this change towards a greater focus on individual player game stats became apparent in the late 1990s. In American it would have been a decade or so earlier.
The advent of individual statistics in a team sport, supported by ‘strength and conditioning’ programs offering short term gain for long term loss, have been two forces most coaches either lack the wisdom to see through, or simply lack the understanding to decipher the information. If a coach fails to correctly identify the common denominators between winning and losing, they will never fulfill their potential as a coach. Sadly, from my observation over the last four decades, this fate awaits the majority of them.
I have seen many school sporting cultures where ‘young Jonny’ will never pass the ball, because he believes (and his belief is continuously reinforced by coach and parents behavior) that if he does things that make him look good, he will receive accolades. Forget about the scoreboard. As long as ‘young Jonny’ looks good!
This is where ‘strength and conditioning’ post the late 1990s in Australian sport has come to lend a hand. The short-term benefit available to all young athletes is that they can gain the equivalent of a year of two of physical maturation in one off-season in the gym. This means that they can make those extra meters in contact, make the big hits, look better statistically and attract the attention of the uneducated observer.
What suffers? Team work. Team success. When ‘young Jonny’ tucks the ball under his arm in rugby, one thing becomes very evident – he is not going to pass the ball! It doesn’t matter if there was an overlap or a extra man, ‘young Jonny’ is going to hold onto that ball.
Conclusion
I suggest that any act or omission by a coach that reinforces individual centric values and tactics in team sport dooms that team to failing to fulfill their potential. Based on my observations, I suggest two things:
- The majority of coaches in the current landscape lack the value of or the ability to identify and correct team-value tactics and culture.
- The trend has and will continue to move away from team-value tactics and culture.
For example, what we have now, say in Australian rugby, are a team full of ‘young Jonny’s’ who either do not possess the skill set to run and pass at the same time, or who choose not to pass. Watch any game of rugby union in Australia, from kids to the national team, and you will see a number of passes per phase that would average below two. You could be forgiven for thinking you were watching 1970’s rugby league, in an era when the skills were low and the physicality was all that was on offer.
I use rugby union as example; however all team sports have suffered the same fate. I often wonder why the majority of these sporting events are called team sports. The majority of male players in Australian team sports are clearly committed to demonstrating their physical superiority over the opponent, with little regard for team outcome.
On the flip side, winning in team sport has never been easier, because most coaches and team fail at the fundamental tactical development step. Imagine how many other steps they fail at?!
So what is the solution? Coach education. Not just the theory of coaching. The education must include the ‘art’ of coaching. And who by? Coaches with personal mastery, not ‘coaches’ with theoretical knowledge only. What are the chances of this happening? Not high. What will happen to those athletes, coaches, sports, countries or teams that do follow this? Great things.
Another reason why success in sport is so easy. So few will ever take the steps that result in success. So a great coach in a great sport has really very little competition.
Note:
For those athletes and coaches who are concerned about the direction of training and want to believe there is a better way – congratulations. There is a better way. We have spend the last four decades discovering better ways to train, and we teach these better ways when we work with athletes or coaches. The KSI Coaching Program aims to provide you with the tools to train athletes and others in their highest and best interests, with no interest in what the dominant trend is or will be in the future. Learn more about KSI Coach Education here https://kingsports.net/courses/
Great article again Ian.
Great to hear you found the value in the article David!
Coach,
Simply love your writings on winning as a team!!!
Essential and relevant, timely though ahead of its time.
As you always are, Coach.
Jeff – appreciate your feedback. I know with your occupational background you have a close affinity with the power of and need for ‘team’. Great to have you involved in KSI! Ian King