Coaches should know everything, right? And shouldn’t the players do what the coach wants without question? No, I disagree. I think that the players should know more than the coach and that they should be making the decisions. Here’s why……
http://rossrugby.co.za
The traditional way of teaching and coaching has usually been for the teacher and coach to know everything and the student or player shuts up, accepts what he/she has been taught or told to do and then gets rated on the execution of that task. This is called the ‘Sage on the stage’ approach and is generally the only way many students and players have ever been taught for this is the only way we really know how to convey knowledge to the next generation. But is this really the best way to ensure the students and players learn and become smarter than before? Are we really engaging the youth to think for themselves in the expectation of becoming smarter than the teacher? I don’t think that the sage on the stage approach is the best way to coach our players, but would rather the guide on the side, become the dominant way to teach and coach in the future.
So what is the guide on the side approach? Simply put the teacher or coach transitions from the all knowledgeable, always right ‘sage ‘who dictates knowledge, to a ‘guide’ who instead of dictating, aims to facilitate the learning process. This facilitation approach will not be very popular with the many generations of teachers and coaches who were taught with the ‘sage on the stage’ approach and who deemed it to be the only way students learn. But, if we really think of it, did that dictatorial teacher or coach really inspire us to learn more about the subject or sport and did you really understand the intricacies of the subject matter or the subtle tactics needed to win matches many years down the line? The answer I am sure will be no. True knowledge is not transferred by parrot fashion, true learning is transferred when the student is actively engaged, participating in the learning process and ultimately really enjoys what he/she is learning. Sure the ‘Sage on the stage’ approach gets results and parents actively seek out these teachers or coaches who get these results, but in the end are we going for results at a young age or are we aiming to develop the student or athlete to excel for many years into the future?
This facilitation approach has begun to take root with all the modern technology suddenly available to teachers and coaches, with classroom lessons being put onto the internet and game footage readily available for players to access. This ‘new’ approach has taken the world by storm in recent years and I believe we are lagging behind. I believe we still hold onto the old ideal of what a teacher or coach should be. I think we still expect the educationalist to be the one who possesses all the knowledge, that they will have all the answers and they are expected to get the results otherwise they are deemed a failure or not good enough. This result orientated atmosphere and the belief that the educationalist should always be right is harming the students and players learning ability and ultimately their performance. I believe that the facilitation approach is the best way of ensuring better results for each individual in the future.
So how does this facilitation approach work in the coaching environment? You may be asking yourself, does he really believe the players should run the team and make the decisions? No. That is not what I am saying, what I am saying is that I believe the players should be made aware of the intricacies of the game and the ‘WHY’ of what the coach wants to achieve, instead of just accepting things and being expected to robotically replicate the coaches desires. I think the players should be encouraged to express their views on playing style, game plans as well as training plans. Yes, you heard me right, players should have a voice as they are the ones that are actually on the field trying to win the games and need the knowledge to make the right decisions when they are needed. Too often coaches bemoan the lack of decision making on the field, but do very little coaching on the matter. This clearly does not make sense.
I believe that when you empower players and students you are opening yourself up to new possibilities that can take your team to a higher performance level than you or the players could have ever expected. The coaches are not always right and should not be expected to be so, nor are the players a bunch of clueless imbeciles waiting to be filled with knowledge. The only major problem with this type of approach is that the coach has to be able to accept when he is wrong and admit that he/she does not know something and that a player could in fact know more. This is not an embarrassing situation to be in and if encountered the player should be praised because when that happens, a thirst for even more knowledge develops in each individual. I believe that if this approach is well managed, players will be able to improve and develop at a far higher pace than had they been told what to do instead of being encouraged to think for themselves. When an individual and ultimately an entire team have a real thirst to discover and learn as much as the coach or even more, then you have successfully encouraged real learning and true development.
By adopting some simple changes to the way you coach, I believe coaches will ensure that a massive thirst for knowledge will occur in each player which will ultimately develop better players in the long term. This approach may take more time to reap the rewards and may not be universally accepted by parents who expect results as the only indicator of success, but ultimately isn’t the job of a coach to prepare players for the long run and not just for the time they had them under their wing? If players do not leave your care with more knowledge than before, for the next coach to develop, are you really coaching or are you just demonstrating how well you make players listen and enact what you want?
In the next blog I will discuss the ‘flipped coaching technique’ something of which I am beginning to use with my own sides and am very excited at the prospect of using this ‘guide on the side’ approach. Something I think may take coaching by storm.
Do you agree with me on this or have I got it wrong? Does the coach still need to know everything or can players have a voice? Let me know your thoughts!
89 @ Just For Kicks:
You think that SARU give a continental fukc what you as a fan think or want to see?
Think again. All they want is your hard earned money.
Thanks Morne,
I’m not sure that there can be a right or wrong way of attack as surely the key element of surprise is lost if a team only attacks in one stereotyped way. Sadly, the Boks seem to have reached that stage now – well to my eye anyway.
Neither do I believe that you should only launch ball in hand attacks when you are camped inside the oppositions 22. There is room for intelligent decisionmaking on the field where a turnover in your own 22 can lead to a long-distance try e.g. Habana’s 2 tries against the Wallabies ironically circa 2005. And let’s not refer to those intelligent plays as helter-skelter rugby, GBS – please?
There is room for a varied attack as the Kiwis have proved with much success over many years and under different coaches. Don’t tell me that we don’t have the talent to pull that off…
Lastly, the protection of our ball has been a problem from the opening half of HM’s first game in charge. Its time that that problem is fixed permanently. And I agree with you Morne, the problem lies largely with the make-up of our loosies.
@ Scrumdown:The Vodacom cup has virtually no spectators, The CC is failing to fill the stadiums, the S15 attendance isn’t as popular, and we’ve even seen some empty seats at the Bok matches. It is a trend that is growing, and the big boys are desperately trying to address it. They’ve seen the big t.v. rights as the way to go. Even here there is a problem – one trying to be overcome by yet more rugby, more matches and more competitions. My point is, that unless you make the game entertaining, people will eventually walk away and turn off their t.v’s. Morne is quite right about being a stakeholder in MTN, but you can’t tell me, that he like the rest of us, doesn’t look around at the end of our two year contract to see what else there is available before re-signing? The same will happen here.
Eventually the hard earned money WILL dry up.
@ Just For Kicks:
You want to fix rugby globally now? See if you can track down a guy called David, GBS will know him too, he has access or the link to a rugby charter that was published, ag probably 4 years ago now about the ills of the game and where it is heading.
I have personally written about the slippery slope rugby is on for longer than I wish to remember because it just makes me depressed.
As far as the ‘formula’ goes and what you compare SA rugby to (the All Blacks) then we are approaching the solution just like SARU will approach a solution arse-about.
You cannot fix rugby in this country starting with Bok rugby and Heyneke Meyer.
Is it so surprising that Meyer is suffering from the same ills as all coaches before him? Trying to ‘fix’ Bok rugby is treating the symptoms and not the disease. You can get Graham Henry in here and I can guarantee you he won’t last a season.
If you want to know what makes the All Blacks successful consider their rugby structures, contracting and development programs from school level through to Super Rugby and ultimately test rugby. Don’t just look at the final product (the All Blacks).
All of their structures are geared to support the national team, in South Africa, every singe one is working against it.
But as fun as this was, I must run, much fetch my laaitie, chat later.
@ fender:
Bud I can point you to countless articles I have written of brain over brawn, don’t get me started.
Before I go though, a final thought. Those who I have blogged with over the years might notice this too.
Funny how my ‘defense’ of Heyneke Meyer is exactly the same as my defense of White and PDV was on this and many other blogs? 🙂
Our problem in SA Rugby is not the coach folks, never has been, but must go now…
85 @ Morné:
With all due respect, most of us have said that protecting the ball on the ground etc is a huge problem for the Boks.
The the 9 passes to the 10, who is miles away in the pocket, the 10 either hoofs it down the opposition throat, or gives a shuffle pass to the 12, who with no space to move as the defenders are already up has to make contact, the forwards don’t “flood” the breakdown point, the 9 gets crappy ball, the 10 is miles away in the pocket etc etc etc
These are coaching issues.
“Think again. All they want is your hard earned money”.
Scrumdown (and Morne now that I come to think of it!), this is exactly why those very fans are full stakeholders. You see they pay for the tickets and the natives get restless.
Was it not the public outcry that got rid of Carel, Strauli etc? And if these same “dom” fans do have that much power can they be equated to an MTN contractee?
Morne, I have noticed your patience and you are consistent in terms of both Snor and HM. Good on ya!
I also believe we ought to give the man a chance.
Its been a pleasure sharing some thoughts with you.
Groente
93 @ Just For Kicks:
It’s not just about paying for tickets at games, although that is part of it.
Mechandise. I’ve NEVER purchased a pirated piece of mechandise in my life. Bu FFS, I can’t afford to kit the whole family out with a new Bok jersey every time a new sponsor comes out, or they move a logo or add a logo.
The same with test tickets. FNB Stadium tickets for the NZ test will cost a fortune for the whole family, and although I don’t think it’ll be full this time around, SARU will make a good few bars. At least enough to keep Forked Tongue Hoskins flying first class for a while.
(Mind you, I have received a few e-mails calling on all Joburg residents to boycott the test in protest at the SARU decision not to honour their word about the Kings SR inclusion not being to the detriment of any other team. So who knows, maybe the ticket sales are miniscule. Doubt it though, SA Rugby supporters are genrally like your average sheep when it comes to protest.)
99 @ Scrumdown:You see, the revolution has begun!!!!!
94 @ Morné:I hear where you are coming from, And agree whole-heartedly that the entire system has to change. But I don’t think it is such a great schlepp (physically, not Saru) to change it. We are almost there in our schoolboy rugby, the U21 showed that they have it, and to a degree, the CC young guns have shown glimpses of it. It is being coached out of the players somewhere between this label and Bok level. So the foundations are there. There is a huge problem in the top personnel, that as Scrumdown has alluded to so often is where the real problem lies. I also agree, that it goes further than Ostrich Meyer, but my simple point is, is that change has to start somewhere, and if it isn’t Meyer then it must be another martyr who is prepared to ‘die’
for the cause.
And the longer they sit and procrastinate over it, the quicker they will lose the support of the fans. One only has to compare it to rugby union and rugby league un the UK to see what fans can do.
@ Loosehead:
Bud it starts there. No flyhalf in the world can attack the advantage line with static ball, not one.
Rugby is about the sum of parts coming together not just one or two parts of it.
It is way too convenient to just blame Morne or our centres.
Morne’s game is a result of 10 things that happens before he even gets the ball, we blame Morne because he cannot perform miracles with shit ball.
Take again WP and their flyhalf, Catrakilis – the most average bloody 10 you will ever see in your life. He plays like a king for WP in the Currie Cup all of a sudden because he gets quality, front foot ball with time to make plays and dictate matters. Put Duvenhage back in there and he will be dropped within a week.
We are missing a quality cleaners.
And my last on this topic as I think we covered it all.
Test rugby is an extension of our Super Rugby, we have exactly the same problems there.
morné @ 103
exactly!!
the only sa team (near the end of the superrugby) who produced quality ball for their backs were the sharks
and
they only did it again STUPID teams (read: their sa opposition).
#104
which bring me back to a question i asked a while ago: what exactly is the structures meyer plans to impliment from junior rugby up? will it correct those flaws etc etc etc? someone earlier this morning thought that heyneke could buy himself some time by giving a better indication of what his “winning rugby” means. well, he can buy himself a lot of time by stating what the said structures are about especially if it address problems like the ones discussed today!
102 @ Morné:
Players can be coached to clean out.
@ Loosehead:
Of course they can, but I have not seen one Super Rugby coach succeed at this yet.
http://www.rugby.com.au/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=y8nhZuMahcM%3D&tabid=1611
thanks for the chat guys
btw
i would not like to get into an argument about rugby with ANY of you … NOT after the way my opinion, by reading your posts was swayed from one side to the other!! 😆
keep up the good work guys
made me realise again why i love THIS site so much!!
..
cheers all
Well, what a lively rugby discussion we had here… rugby, just rugby!
109 @ Ashley:
Yes, you are right… THIS is why we love this site so much!
@ Ashley:
@62 Ek het al laaaaankal iewers hierbo my bek uitgespoel oor die assistent afrigters…Johan van Graan, Ricardo Laubscher, assenfokkenblieftog broetsie!
As DIT die beste top hulpafrigters in die land is dan is ons rugby gedoem; watter internasionale speler sal hom deur hierdie ouens laat leer?
Faaark, hulle kan nie eens Nababeeb se Nama-spannetjie afrig nie, selfs Bokkie Basson en Khakie Goosen doen n beter job met afrigting daar innie Namakwaland.
“A great leader is known by the people he chooses to surround him” (Prince Nicolo Machiavelli).
Wie het Heyneke rondom hom?
Users Online
Total 103 users including 0 member, 103 guests, 0 bot online
Most users ever online were 3735, on 31 August 2022 @ 6:23 pm
No Counter as from 31 October 2009: 41,197,341 Page Impressions
_