The Art Of Good Coaching

Let me be clear about one thing: I’m not a coach. I haven’t got any league titles under my belt and don’t even have any coaching certificates.

But while you might assume this immediately disqualifies me from assessing the finer points of coaching, you’d be wrong. Playing under a variety of coaches, I’ve learnt far more about their art than many of them ever knew. To be precise: I know a lot about what good coaching isn’t.

Coaching isn’t shouting – The aggressive coach

Everyone who has played sport at a decent level will have had a coach in this mould. The coach is pretty much always angry at the team’s (or an individual’s) performance – he will spend all his time berating his players for their mistakes or weaknesses whilst largely ignoring any good points.

This approach is a particular problem in England where we seem to have a belief that players must be beasted for even the smallest of errors.

The coach can’t be seen being nice to the players; this would be a sign of weakness. The players can’t be seen enjoying themselves; this would mean they’re not working hard enough.

But what effect does this actually have on them? Promoting an atmosphere of fear like this sucks the life out of the game. The players go out with the aim of staying on the good side of the coach – they concentrate on avoiding mistakes rather than taking risks and never fulfil their potential.

This is why I cringe when I hear Toby Flood talking about the ‘tongue lashing’ that Martin Johnson gave to Chris Ashton after the Six Nations game against Wales earlier this year. “There was a lot of things he [Ashton] got a tongue lashing for: the celebration, mouthing of to the ref and putting his hands in the ruck.” On the basis of this comment is it really a surprise that the English players seemed tentative and lacking in creativity at the World Cup?

Coaching isn’t watching – the passive coach

At the other end of the spectrum are the passive coaches. While the aggressive coach is shouting and not coaching, the passive coach is watching and not coaching.

These coaches will say good things to the players just so that they go home happy with high self esteem, which can be just as dangerous for the team. The players and the team as a whole don’t identify their weaknesses and remain stuck at the same level – doomed to repeat their mistakes.

What is good coaching?

If successful coaching doesn’t lie in either of the above methods, what exactly is good coaching?

Jim Greenwood, Clive Woodward’s mentor, describes a good coach as: “someone who encourages his players to go out and express themselves, someone who believes in his players and who frees them to go out and perform without any fear of failure.”

One of the best is Wayne Bennet, seven times winner of the Australian NRL. Coaching the Brisbane Broncos, he said their success was: “a direct result of not placing restrictions on the players. I’ve found that as soon as I tell my players I want them to hold on to the ball, that’s when our play becomes really negative and our chances of winning go out the back window.”

Bennet doesn’t want mistake-free games; he give his players the freedom and confidence that only arises when they are liberated from constraints or expectations.

After the game the role of the coach is to help the players improve, not by chastising them but by giving them constructive criticism. Greenwood’s method is clear: “I’ve never seen the point in haranguing a player who already feels bad. Instead each player gets asked two questions; what have they learnt from the game and what is he going to work on in the coming week.”

That attitude is what distinguishes the top coaches from the rest: they care about each player’s individual development, and provide a supporting environment which challenges the player to get better. If only there were more coaches like this out there.