Coach communication and the coaching box

Coach developer work is a field I enjoy. In addition to requests to review training, run demo game-based practice sessions, and review team and club programs, I also get invited to sit in the coaches' box to review game day coaching communication between coaches, and between coaches and players. This later work I have been doing a bit more of recently as part of a coach development role with a state league team.

Almost every time I first sit in a coaches' box for the first time, I observe more commentary than analysis of the game. When this occurs, my emphasise becomes with the group of coaches to move them away from 'commentating' towards ‘strategising’. That doesn’t mean all other forms of communicating ‘disappear’, although I suggest ‘barracking’ is a form of communication that adds little value in the coaches’ box and is mostly a distraction form analysing the game, and similarly 'evaluating' as a once off judgement comment is generally not helpful and often a distraction from analysing the game. 

Rob Mason undertook a study on coach communication (Mason et al., 2020) and concluded 6 types of common coach communication in the coaches box - Table 1, which I find a useful framework when analysing coaches box coach-to coach communication. For a summary of that research, see here

Using Rob's identified communication types, constructive communication in the coaches box might be something like:

 “We’ve been getting killed at stoppages” (Analysis).“Could we try putting another player into the stoppage?” (Strategising)

“She’s not with her opponent” (Observation). “That is the third time that has happened” (Analysis [it is a pattern of behaviour]). “Can we get a message out to her?” (Strategising [need the behaviour to change])

 Table 1. Types of coach communication in the box.

Reacting: an instinctive reaction to the play. Example: “F**k no!”

Barracking: talking as though they are participating in the play. Example: “C’mon DJ, give it!”

Observing: describing what was happening on the field without necessarily seeking a response. Example: “He’s not with his man”

Evaluating: a single observation paired with a positive or negative judgement. Example: “That was poor from our mids”

Analysing: an evaluation of patterns over time, not just one specific incident. Example: “We’ve been getting killed at stoppages”

Strategising: making or suggesting a change to the way the team is playing. Example: “Could we try putting another player into the stoppage?”

 Whenever a coach is discombobulated about something they observe on the field, I recommend the coach initally pause to think before verbalising. In this thinking time, consider 1. whether you need to note the observation and if you have later access to vision of the game, time stamp the observation to refer back to it later when chatting with a player/s or for when sending the player/s vision with notes from the game; or 2, if you need to verbalise in the coaches box then it is to communicate the observation with an accompanying strategy suggestion.

A modification of the OSCAR Framework - Outcome, Situation, Choices, Actions, and Review (Gilbert & Whittleworth, 2009), is a tool that I have used with sport coaches regarding in-game coach communication and strategising. The process consists of workng through the following steps:

Outcome: what is the desired outcome from that game situtaion/that game moment?

Situtation: why did that outcome not occur?

Choices: strategise now, or note for later referal - i.e., is the need for a communication with the player/s now, at the break, after the game, or at training.

Actions: what is needed to change the outcome from that type of game moment in future games (implications for player review and/or player practice)?

Review: as a result of that practice, has player/s learning occurred?

Effective coaches' boxes and 'bench coach' structures will have clearly defined roles for each of the coaches and clearly identified lines of communication. 

I encourage the coaches in the box to pause with a minute or two to go to the break to meet and discuss the messaging that will occur to players during the break so there is consistency of communication between line coaches to their players and the final message of the coach to the playing group before play resumes.

Effective coach communication should express the understanding of movement in a manner which is clear and understandable to the athlete/s, and effective communication can lift an athlete's perception of efficacy from average to a higher level of performance by communicating in a style that aligns with the athlete's individual motivation and self-determination, and it can shift an athlete/s or a team from negative to positive attitude and emotions about the possibilities of performance (Margaret et al., 2010). Effective coach communicaton includes the intentional choice of specific communication strategies to enhance the quality of the coach-to coach and coach-to-athlete relationship and therefore both coach and athlete experience of sport satisfaction (Davis et al., 2019).

Linguistics is becoming increasingly used to help coaches understand the effectiveness of their coach-to-coach and coach-to-player communication. Athlete development depends on the coach pedagogical and content (sport) knowledge and the coach effectiveness as a communicator (Sosiawan & Saptono, 2020). With respect to communication with player/s, depending on the communicative style a coach may positively or negatively impact an athlete’s self-awareness, self-confidence, anxiety, autonomy, and motivation (Kim & Park, 2020). During games, players like coach communication that is clear and direct, confident and calm therefore without nervousness or anxiety (Kennedy & Knight, 2017).

'Language', that is, coach communication skills, are a key attribute in effective coaching (Walsh & Jurreidini, 2016) and yet it is an area that in my experience is given little attention in coach education and on-going development.

Thanks for stopping by and reading this post. If you would like to connect with me on a project to do with this blog or any of the other ideas that I have blogged about, you can contact me by the email link available here

References

Davis, L., Wachsmuth, S., Jowett, S., Räisänen, P., Hajo, K., Nordberg, N., & Sommer, M. (2024). Exploring the Perceived Barriers of Effective Communication Within the Coach–Athlete Relationship: A Sample of Scandinavian Coaches and Athletes. International Sport Coaching Journal, 1(aop), 1-14.

Kennedy, M. D., & Knight, C. J. (2017). Bench behaviour of ice hockey coaches: Psychophysiological and verbal responses to critical game incidents. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 12(3), 303-311.

Kim, Y., & Park, I. (2020). “Coach Really Knew What I Needed and Understood Me Well as a Person”: Effective Communication Acts in Coach–Athlete Interactions among Korean Olympic Archers. International journal of environmental research and public health, 17(9), 3101.

Margaret, G. D., Kirubakar, S. G., & Kumutha, N. (2010). Communication skills: a cognitive–behavioural approach to enhance relationship skills in young sport coaches. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 44(Suppl 1), i49-i50.

Mason, R. J., Farrow, D., & Hattie, J. A. (2020). An analysis of in-game feedback provided by coaches in an Australian Football League competition. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 25(5), 464-477.

Gilbert, A., & Whittleworth, K. (2009). The OSCAR coaching model. Lulu. com.

Sosiawan, E. A., & Saptono, T. (2020, October). Coaching communications model for improving athlete achievement. In Proceeding of LPPM UPN “VETERAN” YOGYAKARTA CONFERENCE SERIES 2020–POLITICAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCE SERIES (Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 200-207).

Walsh, J., & Jureidini, J. (2016). Language as a key resource for the football coach: a case study of in-game coaching at one Australian rules club. In The Discourse of Sport (pp. 29-49). Routledge.