Methods, Approaches and Theories of Coaching

I recently had a little discussion on Twitter about whether you can coach without an underpinning theory of learning. I thought you had to nail your colours to the wall. Lee Conroy respectfully disagreed.

We didn’t get too deep into the debate, but it did get me thinking about my own position so I thought I would make it clear here. The quick summary is this:

You should flip between methods. You can flip between approaches but eventually you need to land on an underpinning theory of coaching.

What do I mean by this?

There’s are broadly three levels to coaching:

1. The methods we use (what we do)

2. The approach those methods are embedded within (how we do it)

3. The underpinning theory (why we do it)

Methods

Methods are the day to day things. The drills, the small-sided games, the activities. The verbs of sport. 

These are agnostic. They are not tied to any specific approach or theory. 

You can operate as a coach purely on the level of methods and everyone can have a great time.

However, if you want to get more from your coaching you should put certain methods together into an approach. (And you probably already do)

Approaches

An approach is an opinion of how to best use the methods. For example, perhaps your approach is to groove the movements first, then add pressure. That’s very common. Other approaches are the constraints-led approach, Game Sense, TGfU and the digital-video games approach.

These provide a common framework for you to work. It’s more progressive and less scattergun. If you are coaching cricket and you want players to get better at all, an approach is far more effective than randomly picking methods.

You can flip between approaches, but probably not that often.

It’s harder to change approach but not impossible. An approach needs longer to establish if its working; a few sessions at least. Ideally a full block to see what progress happens. An approach might take years to bear fruit (although you can see some changes quickly).

Approaches all pull from the same pool of methods, so you can easily run a block using the constraints-led approach, then another block using more traditional error identification and correction approach.

Truth is, most coaches coach from some kind of an approach even if they don’t know it. The one most of us use is the way we were coached. There’s no drama if coaches want to stick with that. However, it’s also possible to try a different way for a while. You might find one approach works better with different players than another.

We still have flexibility at this level.

Theories

Finally, at the root is a theory. Most coaches don’t spend a lot of time in the philosophical and psychological roots of coaching but it is always there because it informs how was learn movements and increase skill.

The dominant theory, as you may know, is called “information processing” (IP). It theorises the brain as a computer. We learn by copying predetermined templates of movements until they become unconscious. It’s a linear progression from unskilled to skilled.

The newer theory is called ecological dynamics (ED). With ED there are no templates. Instead we learn through interaction between us, the task and the environment. It’s a non-linear system. That emerges rather than progresses along a fixed path.

This video explains the differences in detail.

As a side note, you can use the same methods and approaches but with different underpinnings. Although this will lead to sessions that look very different because your underlying assumptions have changed.

And the differences between these are fundamental: Learning can’t be linear one day and non-linear the next. We can’t learn by perception-action coupling on Tuesdays and templates on Fridays. It’s like being a Christian one week and a Buddhist the next. 

We have to pick the one we think is right because it informs everything we do.

Flexibility

So yes, we should be flexible and adaptable to i visual player needs. Mainly we do this with methods, sometimes with approaches. Yet also we should be firm in our underpinning theories because you can’t switch between those.

Coaching Cricket Using The Hundred

Don’t tell the county fans, but I enjoyed the spectacle of The Hundred - The English 100 ball “countdown cricket” competition - and so have many of the kids I coach.

So we decided to test out The Hundred as a coaching tool.

In the summer I ran a coaching week for 20 kids aged 7-12 where we played a modified version of countdown cricket as a basis of developing cricket skills and having a good time.

While I didn’t conduct a scientific analysis of motivation, satisfaction, inspiration and skill acquisition; I can anecdotally say we had a lot of fun, engagement levels were through the roof and players played well.

Here’s how we did it.

The Basics

Every session, we played at least one game of countdown cricket. The format was modified from The Hundred:

• 50 balls per innings (5 sets of 10).

• Most runs win.

• Out means out, but batsmen can return at the end to ensure all 50 balls are used.

• Batsmen have to retire at after 10 balls faced (but can return).

• Bowlers can bowl 10 balls (either as a set of 10 or two fives).

• Either 5, 9 or 10 a side (depending on how many children at the camp)

• Other laws of cricket applied broadly normally (it’s a kids week, we were generous with LBW and so on).

We used a soft windball. This was mainly because it was easier for swapping batsmen and innings. However, we also did not have access to a pitch, so used the outfield.

Skill Points

Players each had a “bingo card” of skills they could tick off once completed in the match. There were 30 skills across batting bowling and fielding such as:

• Score a run in the V

• Bowl someone out

• Attempt a direct hit run out

As you can imagine, some are more difficult than others, but most kids could complete most of the skills with some practice and effort.

Once 5 skills were ticked off the players levelled up.

Level Up

The aim was to get through the levels and defeat the Boss level by the end of the camp. This is stealing from the Digital Video Games Approach blatantly, but to paraphrase a saying; good coaches borrow, great coaches steal!

When players levelled up, they get a randomly assigned “super power”, 1 per level. This is a limited time constraint that you can use in the game. I wrote 18 different super powers and printed them onto cards. The cards were handed out at the start of the match.

It was very exciting for everyone during the handing out ceremony!

Example powers are;

• Every time the batter hits the ball they get a run (5 balls).

• Bowler bowls 3 dots and the last 2 balls can’t be scored from.

• Catch can be taken after first bounce (5 balls).

Once you burn your power, you can’t use it again, but you get another one in the next match.

The kids were highly motivated to go through the levels to get more powers. It seemed to work well that they kept getting new ones as a motivating factor to make the game interesting and set new challenges for the opposition.

Boss Challenge

Most players didn’t get through the five levels during the week, but it didn’t matter because they were all enjoying trying to do it. It wasn’t supposed to be “complete it or fail” as we all learn at different rates and have different motivations.

Two of the better kids did make it all the way through. They faced the boss challenge. 

The boss challenge was individual but it was supposed to be extremely hard: One player was set the challenge of scoring 50 runs in 20 balls and taking 5 wickets in his 10 balls.

Neither did it but one got very close, missing out by just a couple of runs making it a spectacular finish to the week.

Using Countdown Cricket

My very biased conclusions at this one off experiment are:

• Countdown cricket in itself is a useful format for game-based learning.

• The powers ups are constraints that aid learning hugely for all players.

• It’s a lot of fun to level up and use super powers, which is the main motivation for most of the kids

• It would probably work for more performance-focused players but would need a bit of adjusting to speed up learning.

Cricket Batting Footwork: Repetition without Repetition

Teaching cricket batting technique using representative design can be tricky: We don’t have a template or an exemplar because ideal technique from a template is not representative.

Yet we also know the more you practice something the better you get. So to keep the practice as much like the game as possible while also “getting in reps” we can apply constraints instead.

Here’s an example.

This game can be played in nets, in a middle practice or - as shown in the picture - in a sports hall with a windball. The feed can be anything from underarms to bowlers, depending on how representative you want the challenge to be.

The aim of this game is to demonstrate to young players the power of a “step and swing” without forcing it as the only option (repetition without repetition). Cricket coaches know that transferring weight and staying balanced give batters a better chance of making an effective contact with the ball.

The batsman is trying to achieve a points value to “level up”.

1. Face 6 balls, score 6 points. Underarm feeds.

2. Face 6 balls, score 12 points. Overarm feeds.

3. Face 6 balls, score 12 points. Bowling machine or sidearm feeds.

4. Boss Level: Face 6 balls, score 20 points. Bowlers, machine or sidearm feed.

If the batter completes the level they move up. If they don’t, they try again. If they have time they can try the challenge again and increase total points scored across the whole challenge.

Naturally levels can be adjusted based on the ability of the players and the time you have.

How do you score points?

In the picture you can see two boxes (green and orange) and a blue line made from cones. These have points values:

• +2 for either putting front foot in the orange box, or back foot in the green box

• -1 for breaking the blue line

The batter can gain or lose additional points:

• -1 Play and miss, edge behind.

• +1 Thick edge attacking shot, good contact defensive shot.

• +2 Good contact attacking shot.

You can see a perfect score (24 points in 6 balls) requires effective foot placement and a good contact from an attacking shot. Yet players are not locked in to any particular shot. Decision-making is still a part of the game.

This game shows you can get the reps in and guide players towards effective methods while still not locking them into an “ideal” technique that is not robust in different circumstances.

It’s also a lot of fun.

Super Powers in Cricket Coaching

If you think “super powers” sounds like something you get in a video game, you’re right. But it’s also a tool to help cricketers both enjoy the game more and improve their skills.

Developed by Amy Price in football as part of a “video game approach” to coaching sport, super powers can also be applied to cricket practice. They also are a way to “constrain to afford” if you are using the constraints-led approach. 

The magic in super powers is they provide challenges in two ways:

1. Players have to work out how to earn super powers in the game.

2. Players have to work out how to overcome the problem of someone with a super power.

In other words, they draw attention to certain parts of the game, like any useful constraint.

Now we know why they are a useful tool, what is a super power in cricket practice?

A super power is a temporary way to gain an advantage over the opposition. In video games it’s the star you run over in Mario Kart to be invincible for a few seconds. In cricket there are many options. For example - as The Teesra recently pointed out - bowling dots could allow the bowler to finish an over early. This robs the batsmen of scoring opportunities.

You can see in this example, bowling and fielding attention is drawn to preventing a run. If it succeeds, a batting pair then have to work out how to recover from the disadvantage. This looks much like a chasing side falling behind the run rate in a match and so is training the ability to adapt to the situation.

Example super powers for cricket

What other ways can you use super powers in cricket?

Here are some more ideas. These are not complete nor perfect for every environment so put your “practice design” critical hat on when you try them.

• Take a catch to earn “one hand one bounce” for the next over.

• Hit a straight boundary to get double runs for the next 3 balls.

• Keep the opposition to scoring less than 4 in an over to have the batting team score half runs for the next 3 balls (i.e. a single is zero, two is worth one).

• Hit the stumps with a throw from the outfield (out or not) to make the next ball “tip and run” (if they hit it they have to run).

• Score 2+ on the off side to get a bonus run added to each of the next 3 balls.

• Batting pair score off every ball in an over - or survive two overs - to earn a life (wicket is not out, counts as a dot).

• Batsman has to bat with a thin/middling bat for one over if the bowler bowls good line and length four times in an over.

• If the bowler beats the bat or finds the edge, batsmen must run next time they hit the ball.

• Any run out means both batsmen are out.

• Make wides +2 for the first one, +3 for the second and +4 for the third in every over. To balance this, a dot after a wide takes one off.

• A batsman has a “magic ball” they can chose once per over that is worth double runs. However, if out the batting team lose 10 runs.

• Set up two boundaries instead of one. The “in play” boundary is defined by skill execution. A long boundary hit brings the boundary in. A wicket takes the boundary out.

You may have noticed wickets are to be avoided as a punishment in power ups because although they grant an advantage to the fielding team, they are also the biggest punishment a batsman can face. Use them wisely, especially if the format of practice is “out means out”.

If you have more super powers that work for you, please get in touch.

Reviews in Constraints-Led Approach Cricket Coaching

If you are taking ecological theory to cricket coaching by using the Constraints-Led Approach (CLA) you might wonder about reviews.

In traditional circles, a review has a certain look. You are probably picturing kids standing listening to a lecture from coach about how to do something, or what they are doing wrong. Naturally, this doesn’t fit CLA with it’s focus on self-organising through constrained activities.

However, reviews still have a place in CLA cricket coaching.

The principles of CLA still apply, most notably the intention must be clear and agreed with players. The review in CLA acts as a chance to,

1. Check understanding in the game.

2. Draw attention to opportunities.

Each type of review needs to be pre-agreed. Most players are used to the lecture and won’t know what you expect if you dive in without clarification. However, once you have agreed, here are the main types of review:

Pause

On a whistle, or call of “pause” players run in to the coach and discuss what they noticed for 20 seconds. The coach then asks players to feedback to each other.

As coach aim to do very little. Ask the players key questions if you need to kick off the conversation but don’t intervene with a solution. That’s what they are trying to find.

The discussion can range but it’s helpful to focus on;

1. What players noticed

2. What options they had

3. What choice they made (was it the most effective one?)

4. How well they did (outcome)

5. Finish with what to do next.

This process takes time to get right so you might need to do some scaffolding with questions at first like “what choices did you have in that moment?”, especially with kids who default to “yeah, that was good”. Stick with it and they will start to think more about choices and decisions with less prompting.

You also have the opportunity to draw player’s attention to opportunities they may have missed. If you do this make sure the players finish with the next action rather than you.

Reset

You will notice times when players have attention on other things than the intention. For example, in middle practice a batting pair may start trying to smash every ball despite the intention of staying in.

If this happens without players self-correcting, you call “Reset”.

Players get into their team or group and have 15 seconds to remind each other of the intention and what they need to change. The idea is to recreate a mid-pitch batting chat or captain-bowler chat in the game, so players don’t have long. They break and restart.

You do not intervene directly unless players ask to be reminded of the intention. However, you do have the option (either you or the players) of taking the game back a few balls to try again. This isn’t always appropriate depending on other constraints - time or ability of bowlers to recreate a delivery, for example - but can be useful.

You can start counting down to the Reset over a number of balls (3-5) to see if players are able to self-organise live without stopping the game. You could remind the players upfront, or wait to see if they can remember.

Hot Review

A Hot Review is one player reviewing without stopping the practice. They can reflect out of the game and go back in.

Usually there is a space in cricket practice to do this at the end of an over. In nets, you can pull the bowler out to Hot Review. Batsmen batting alone is tricky, but can be done if the bowling group do a Reset simultaneously.

Once the player is in the review, they have 10-30 seconds to say what they saw based on the intention. You can offer advice if you feel they are not picking up on the right information (but remember you only have a few seconds so you can’t say much). Then ask them what they will do next.

Live Review

On the call of their name, the player knows you have seen something and need an acknowledgement, but they don’t stop the activity. There are many signals you can pre-agree but here are a few:

• Hand up: “I saw my mistake and I can self-correct”

• Fist bump: “I did something awesome or exceptional”

• Point to head: “I don’t know”

• ‘square’ sign: “I want to Hot Review”

Offline Review

The aim of an offline review is to take players out of the game or activity and observe it as a coach or analyst. In cricket, this often happened naturally so take the chance.

For example, batsmen waiting to bat, or fielders in low traffic areas can easily be instructed to start reviewing. A whiteboard or notepad is useful to note down what they notice about other player’s approach or mindset.

You can pose questions about others techniques or tactics, or about what behaviours players are displaying. You can ask players to think of rule changes to make or constraints to apply to better meet the intention. Then, put them into the game and tell them “show me” and put their changes into action.

This kind of review is especially useful for when a player has little to do like when fielding or waiting to bat and so are likely to lose focus on the activity.

Player-led Review

As players get better at the review process and understand the role, they will start being able to review themselves without your intervention. All the above apply but are player-led:

• Pause. Player calls time out (“T” symbol) and everyone gathers together to pause. You listen and tell them when time is up.

• Hot Review. Player takes the chance of a break in play to speak with you and review. You can ask questions and offer advice, but keep the entire interaction to 30 seconds with the player telling you their next move.

• Live Review. You scan for the agreed hand signals. Players do them without prompting. When you see one, you acknowledge it.

These three are much harder to get right, especially for players who are used to being told what to do. They will take longer with more mistakes, so have patience once you introduce the option.

The aim of such reviews is not to tell players things - although you have space to instruct as a form of constraint - but to give players reflective time representative of a game.

Player’s natural inclination is to focus on the outcome first (“I got out”, “We are losing”, “I got hit for six”) which is unhelpful. This means your role is to help them look at the process instead. Direct attention to options, opportunities and affordances they miss. Then help players work out if they made the most effective decisions from those choices.

Credit to Drowning in the Shallows, Mark Bennett (specifically this podcast) and Stuart Armstrong for influencing this article.

How to Connect with Cricketers as a Coach

Most coaches now know the power of “soft skills” and finding connections with players.

I’ve just read Coaching Athletes to Be Their Best, which argues that connections are crucial to dealing with the extreme emotions we feel in sport. No matter why you are a coach, you almost certainly want players who are motivated, resilient to setbacks, improving their skills and working as a team. 

But more than the game itself, genuine connections with and between players creates an intrinsic enjoyment that we all need as humans. This is enormously satisfying regardless of game performance.

Whatever your own motivations as a coach, connection is critical.

So how do we get there? Here’s what the author, Stephen Rollnick, suggests.

Listen

Listening - really listening - is a skill. You all expect players to listen when you coach. If they can do it, you can. You need to be a world-class listener right back.

This is counter-intuitive. It’s common to assume the coach is the person with the answers telling the player what to do. However, when we are connecting it’s a conversation not a lecture. A dance not a wresting match. You can’t tell someone what they think and feel, only listen to it.

Your instinct may be to try and fix problems. You might feel judgement over player’s commitment, motivations or coachability. You could feel the urge to take control of the situation and sort it out.

Don’t.

Listen instead. 

Ask a question then listen to what players say. Try and work out what they think and feel. It’s not hard when you are focused. But it is hard to focus.

The question doesn’t have to be clever or deep. It can be to do with the game or something else. “How are you” might be enough for a general chat or you might think of something more specific like “What do you think about the match?”. The point is, be open, focused and ready for the reply.

The goal is to be genuinely interested in and curious about the human in front of you. No ulterior motive.

Reflect

If you are not fixing things, what do you say once you have listened?

You make a statement - called a listening statement - that is a guess about what the player thinks or feels. 

If you have listened, this will be broadly right. For example if you ask a simple question like “how are you” and the player says “not great” then you simply reply with “you’re not feeling right”, leaving space for the player to talk more.

Listening statements are powerful because they contain no judgement or attempt to fix, they just show you have listened. You’re interested in what the player thinks rather than having an agenda.

Another version of this is stating something specific and positive you have noticed about the player (affirmation). For example you could point out a player always cleans up without being asked. It’s another way of showing you are interested in the player as a person without judgement

But making statements like these means the player is in control. 

They may open up (“coach, things are bad at home, I’m so glad you asked...”), they might clam up (“fine thanks, you?”), or something between. However you simply stick to your curious listening and reflecting and connection builds. 

Sometimes this leads to problems to solve, sometimes it’s chat about things players care about, sometimes it leads to nothing. 

Reconnect

And this leads to the final point: connection can happen quickly but you need to stick at it because people change and adapt.

Keep being curiously interested and keep listening. Players learn to feel safe to say what they really think and feel, even from simple questions.

Take every chance you can to connect with honest curiousity and listening statements and you will both become and stay a trusted person in your player’s lives.

This article adapted from Chapter 7 of Coaching Athletes to Be Their Best, click here to buy a copy. 

How to Use The Constraints-Led Approach for Cricket

What is the constraints-led approach (CLA) to coaching and how can you you use it to develop cricketers?

This is a guide for cricket coaches at every level to using the CLA: Why you would want to, and how you apply it when it is often so different to traditional coaching approaches.

Why listen to me? I am a cricket coach with over 25 years experience at all levels. I am no expert on CLA, nor am I a researcher, but I do have varied experience in applying the approach. This guide is not a set of dogmatic rules. It is a personal account for cricket coaches who have heard a bit about CLA and want a simple practitioner guide.

Let’s get to it.

Why Constraints-Led Coaching?

This section explains why CLA might be for you as a cricket coach. You can skip it if you want to get to actually implementing sessions.

CLA is a set of tools you can use to coach cricket at any level. It’s a new approach to coaching, so it’s unlikely you will have been taught this way. It’s also unlikely a formal coaching course taught you to coach this way. To put it into action you need you to start from a new perspective.

Given this level of commitment, why would you do it?

The strongest argument is transfer of skills from training to games. As we will see, CLA rests heavily upon making practice realistic. This type of practice is more likely to transfer into matches.

There are also a number of other reasons to adopt the approach.

CLA tends to be more fun, engaging and joyful than other approaches. The design of sessions help players become creative, adaptable, effective decision-makers who are self-sufficient on match day. CLA training assumes players learn better if they are motivated to discover solutions themselves. Research backs all this up, and so do my personal experiences.

A warning: Not everyone agrees with the above paragraph. There is much debate in academic circles. However, CLA certainly has a case and lots of support from coaches and academics alike.

In other words, it’s worth a try to draw your own conclusions.

If you are on the fence about trying CLA - and I am assuming you are if you are reading this - then try the recommendations here for a while. Ideally you will dive in to a group for a few months, but at least give it a few weeks. Then check in with players: How much are they enjoying the sessions? What progress are they making? How are they feeling in games?

You can decide for yourself from there.

One final point to remember through this guide is that CLA is not a prescriptive approach. CLA is about exploration by the coach as well as the players. You might find more useful tools in your environment than outlined here. If you do, use them. As we will learn, the environment and those within it shape each other, so to apply external, universal rules is against the very spirit of CLA.

Still thinking about it?

Read on.

What is a constraints-led approach?

A constraints-led approach is a way of coaching built on the underpinnings of ecological dynamics (ED). While it’s not crucial to know the theory, it is important to know where the methods come from.

The core assumption is;

“functional patterns emerge from the interactions between system components or agents” (Davids et al, 2013)

Or to put it in simplified coaching terms; skill emerges from the interaction between players and the environment of conditions, situation and opposition.

Davids et al go on, “humans are surrounded by banks of energy flows or arrays that can act as specifying information variables (e.g., optical, acoustic, proprioceptive) to constrain the coordination of actions with a performance environment. Critical information sources continuously shape intentions and enhance decision-making, planning and organization, during goal-directed activity.”

To simplify again, context is crucial.

The information players need to perform exists within each unique environment. Players improve skill by adapting to this information.

For example, playing a spinner on a turning pitch is a very different environment to playing a seamer on a green top, and gives batsmen, bowlers and fielders different variables. You don’t expect a player good at playing seam to automatically be good at playing spin. This is true for every variable.

In this dynamic, complex environment, “a key goal of learning is to educate the intentions of learners so that they understand the information sources that can be harnessed to support an action... Therefore, when designing learning tasks... it is most important that task protocols sustain the link between intentions and available specifying information to regulate actions.”

And it is here the Constraints-Led Approach to practice design comes in. The CLA, assumes these things to be true and then gives you a framework to design and adapt sessions. The sessions are built on principles of;

• Intent. Sessions are focused on setting a problem that players try to fix.

• Design the Task. Tools like cones, bat size and points systems are used to designed the task so it directs attention (These tools are the constraints part of CLA)

• Representative Design. The more practice is game-like, the more transfer to games. Coaches can slide along a scale depending on player need.

• Repetition without Repetition. Practice needs to include variability to make sure solutions can work in different contexts.

In comparison to these principles, most coaches are taught to develop skill on a “textbook” model. Coaches correct errors in stable isolation then put them into the game. If you are to try CLA, forget this model for now. It doesn’t fit.

Instead of a fault-fixer think if yourself as a problem-setter, manipulating the environment using tools - called constraints - for solutions to emerge.

How do you apply a constraints-led approach to cricket?

Time for some nitty-gritty.

What do CLA sessions look like and how do you coach with them?

In CLA, constraints do the work. Your job as coach is to present a game-like problem and use constraints to offer opportunities to solve the problem.

So before every session you need to know:

1. Intention. What is the problem the players need to solve?

2. Level. Are the players learning (coordination) or adapting an existing skill?

When you know this, you can come up with your activities. Remember, activities look like the game as much as possible. They are defined by the constraints you use. The obvious example is a cricket net; a way of batting and bowling without needing fielders. This is a constraint. Under CLA, you design activities around such constraints.

However before we get there, we need to know which method we are focusing on:

1. Explore. Come up with ways to solve a problem.

2. Exploit. Hone an existing solution.

3. Execute. Test an existing solution in a highly variable and unstable environment.

Different activities can have a different method depending on player need.

For example, a beginner who can’t bowl with a straight arm. The intention is to keep a straight elbow and also land the ball in a useful area. This player is still at the coordination level (bent elbow) and will start at explore while they try to work out a method.

If they start to keep their arm straight but are still not accurate, they can move to adaptation level and stay at explore to get more accurate. If they are struggling to develop a solution to the straight arm, you might think about moving to exploit and providing some cues and demonstration as a way to direct attention. (The Language of Coaching is great primer for cueing players.)

This informs how you set your constraints.

Constrain to afford (Design the task)

Constraints, broadly, are information sources that draw attention towards solutions. There are three kinds of constraint:

• Task. Scoring system, pitch length, bat size, ball type, field settings, nets, feed type

• Environment. Surface, weather, opposition

• Individual. Confidence, motivation, strength, fatigue.

List your constraints for each activity based on the intention. For example, if you want batsmen to focus on surviving you can allocate points or extra batting time for balls faced without losing a wicket. As well as drawing players towards the intention, constraints allow you to tweak how much of the game you "rub out" to reach your intention

Remember, practice needs to be as close to the game as possible, so make the activity 3 or more out of 10, where 10 is a full game in specific conditions and 0 is fixed, unopposed practice.

Sometimes you want to dial down the realism in order to help progress players. For example, a beginner has no idea how to hit a ball straight: You can dial down to a 1 and instruct them to hit a ball by “swinging through the line” from an underarm feed through cones. This is still CLA. You can dial up for for players who find this too simple.

We also need to build in variability (repetition without repetition). Variable practice contains more of the game than fixed practice so is useful. Research has found that players self-reported level of challenge is best between 4 and 8 out of 10. Too little and players have no freedom to discover and adapt. Too much and players are overwhelmed.

You adjust constraints to manage this challenge level.

For fielding, an 8 could be an activity where a is fielder in unfamiliar conditions, under fatigue and trying to field in a simulated last over of a match against a batsman they have never seen before. They don’t know if the ball will come to them, and when it does come they don’t know how it will arrive.

Highly stable, in contrast, could be an activity with a stationary ball. The fielders knows when it’s their turn and can take as long as they need to get the desired outcome. The variability is 3 out of 10. Simplification is important to “rub out” as many information sources as possible, but you do still want to give players some kind of freedom. So avoid rubbing out too much of the game.

The former activity focuses players on executing their skill under match conditions. It may be too much for some, depending on their level. The latter is useful for players to coordinate and explore solutions. This may be too easy for some. Adjusting the constraints to the needs of the players is all important.

None of these activities are off limits to CLA, it's just that we are trying to have players in an activity that looks and feels like cricket. In other words, use constraints to “tweak the dials” to help the players at their level reach the intention.

Activity Design

An activity, then, is a cricket problem set by the coach. The activity is built using constraints and can be tweaked to match player "age and stage".

As you probably already realised, this makes sessions dynamic and non-linear.

You are not sticking to a set plan, you are constantly scanning your session for players adaptation to constraints. As players respond to the constraints, you can turn up or down the dials. Bring in more realism to get closer to “playing the game”, or simplify the activity.

While you are doing a lot of dynamic adjusting, the basic framework of activities will still look very familiar:

• Modified games/middle practice

• Nets

• Fielding Activity

Much of what you do will be dictated by practical session constraints; what facilities and equipment do you have? How many players and coaches are there? How long have you got? These are hard boundaries for you with operate within.

After that, set up a activities that best meet your intentions. I find it useful to have a checklist that lists:

• Intention and level

• Baseline activities (such as a net or middle practice) and whether they are explore, exploit or execute. (You don’t need many activities because we change the constraints more than the activities)

• Constraints for each activity.

• How close the activity can look and feel like the game (R = representativeness) from 0-10

• How much variability (V) from 0-10

Once you have this plan, get the session started and get exploring and tweaking with the players.

Example constraints-led approach cricket session

Let's take a typical indoor net session in the UK as an example. Most of the year, this is how UK cricketers practice, and there are clear issues to overcome if you want to apply CLA. Bowlers cannot bowl for long on hard surfaces adf the ball bounce and pace is wildly different from outdoor grass pitches. These are unavoidable problems.

Here is a way I would use CLA.

First, the intention. Let’s say our batters are working on scoring off more balls by rotating the strike. The bowlers intention is to make this difficult by being focused (setting appropriate fields, planning against different batsmen, and committing to the plan).

The players are schoolboy U14s with a range of experiences. They all bat and bowl with no specialists. All are at adaptation level (the can all bat and bowl with some level of success).

We are in a sports hall with 4 net lanes.

There are 2 net games, and 2 bowling only nets.

The first net game is explore (hit the ball into gaps). The aim is to try and put the ball into different areas. It is not game-like (R=3) but does give the batsmen freedom to explore (V=6), albeit against a more consistent feed than a match.

Constraints are;

• Ball feed from 16m throwdowns or 20m ball thrower. (Possibly bowling machine if needed although this will drop the V to 4 and the R to 2).

• Cones to mark target areas in 6 different angles.

• Batsmen must try to score from every ball by an attacking shot though cones.

The second activity is exploit (strike rotation) for batsmen and explore (focus) for bowlers. This dials up the feeling of a game, even though it is still a net. The R=6. As batsmen are facing bowlers there is more variability (7).

The constraints are;

• The mission is to score as many points as possible with the bat.

• Batters bat for 30 balls each, bowlers bowl in pairs (6 balls each).

• U14 bowlers bowl from 18m with a 4.75oz ball.

• A chalk marker line is placed on a good length for outdoors. Bowlers attempt to bowl over this.

• A whiteboard is used to mark the field.

• Batsmen get points for an effective front foot or back foot attacking shot into a gap and drop and runs.

• Batsmen get 5 balls they call call any time that gets double points.

• Batsmen lose points for a poor decision to go forward, a miss, an edge behind or hitting in the air towards a fielder (as marked on the board) or getting out (bowled, LBW, stumped, hit wicket)

If you want to increase the variability further (for example a strong batsman against a weak bowler) you can add further constraints: swing balls, spin mats, double up mats, a smaller bat or extra stumps.

The bowlers are exploring focus by being asked what they think is focused and unfocused behaviour. They then set a marker for how many deliveries they can stay focused for. The number of balls is tracked to see how close it is to the marker.

Any bowlers who are not in the “live” net are in the bowling net. They can do a modified bowling activity with an aim to maintain focus. This is another explore activity which is much less game-like (R=3, V=4).

The constraints are;

• Hit the target areas at different distances.

• Target cones/chalk at different lengths and lines (eg. good length, yorker).

• Bowling distances set at 16m, 18m and 20m.

If available, a coach can scaffold this activity with technical cues. It’s important not to start giving solutions if you add instruction as this drops the variability down to 0. Cues can be used as a guide to a possible solution, but always try and use constraints that afford rather than insist (i.e.. higher variability).

After the session is complete; review the scores, adjustments to constraints and feedback from the players to decide if the activity was at the appropriate challenge level. Adjust as you see fit for the next session.

Of course, this is one example from an infinite number of configurations depending on the task, environment and individuals. However, hopefully you can see that the CLA gives you an equally infinite adjustable set of dials to match the challenge to the players and see skill emerge as a result.

Summary

• CLA is a set of coaching tools based on ecological dynamics: Skill emerges from the environment.

• Coaching with CLA is designing practice to set a representative problem for players to solve.

• Problems can be about coordination (learning to learn movements) or adaptability. Players can explore, exploit or execute different solutions.

• Coaches use constraints to help players discover solutions. Constraints can be based on the task, environment or individual.

• Practice looks and feels like the game, with practice constraints adjusted to match the individual stage of the players.

(NB. Huge thanks to Marianne Davies and Danny Newcombe for helping me write this guide by clarifying some of the finer points. The key book for CLA is here. The paper mentioned is Davids et al (2013) “An Ecological Dynamics Approach to Skill Acquisition: Implications for Development of Talent in Sport”)

OK

Have you ever finished a coaching instruction to players with “Okay?”

Maybe you say “understand?”, “got it?” Or “does that make sense?” I have many times, and I’m sure I will again. 

But saying OK is unhelpful to coaches. Worse, it could be undermining your aims to help your players. I’m trying to stop saying it. 

Here’s why.

OK adds nothing

Think back to the last time you were talking with a group of players. You make an excellent point then you say “okay?” at the end. 

When was the last time a player replied that it was not OK?

How often - despite them agreeing it’s OK - do they misunderstand the instruction?

I’m willing to bet the answers are;

1. never

2. quite a lot

If the job of okay is to confirm player understanding, it does a rotten job.

There are other reasons you might find yourself saying OK, but they all suffer from adding nothing;

• It’s a question. Coaches are told to ask questions. If you make a statement then finish with “OK” it feels like a question. But really, it’s still a statement.

• It’s player-centred. By asking, you are confirming with players it’s what they want to do. Except, you are still really telling them. Worse, you are telling them with no conviction because you’re asking for permission as if you don’t really know.

There is nothing wrong with statements or instructions as a coaching tool. They have uses (although in Constraints-Led Approach coaching it is used far less often). 

By bolting on a request for permission you reduce the power of an instruction. Players may or may not pick up on it - it depends who they are - but you can avoid the risk totally by dropping the OK.

Replace OK

So what do we do instead?

1. Ask actual questions. Instead of an instruction with an OK at the end, look to ask open questions that tease out answers.

2. Prime players. Tell players you are going to be asking more questions and it’s acceptable to not know the answer. Encourage a moment of thinking before an answer is shouted out (I find putting a larger group into pods of 2-4 players to discuss it first is powerful).

3. Use “What else?”, If you find yourself making a statement and are tempted to say okay, say “what else?” instead. Give the players a second to think about it - remembering not knowing is also acceptable - and you will get some gold back.

4. Use “show me”. If your statement is a strong one and players seem to understand, you can tell them to show you immediately. This is a much better check for understanding than a mindless nod.

5. Encourage the players to talk first and last. If you prime players that you only speak in the middle, and the rest of it is up to them, you can tease out answers from the players themselves.

If we do this, if the occasional verbal tick of “okay” slips out, it won’t undermine your goal of helping the players you coach.

Perform Beyond Pressure

Perform Beyond Pressure is a book about sporting performance by Rich Hudson. It’s an enjoyable read and I recommend every coach picks up a copy, especially if you work with players who feel the pressure of big game situations. It’s certainly helpful.

The underlying premise is based on an “inside out” view of the world. The theory is we create meaning and pressure in our own minds. We think there is pressure in big games because there is more on it; reputation, pride, possibly money. Players and coaches think they are defined by how well they do. But that pressure is not in the world, it’s in the mind and projected onto events.

Once we realise this, the book goes on, we can let go of the pressure, just play one ball at a time and enjoy it whatever the outcomes. Performance isn’t what you are, it’s what you do.

The book then talks about how this freedom from self-built pressure leads to access to your instincts, a focus on improvement over results and naturally better performances.

This sounds magical, but how do we know if it is correct?

This is perhaps the biggest concern about the central argument. It assumes meaning is applied to the environment by the humans who are there. We receive input from the environment, apply meaning to it and behaviour pops out as a response. Animals cannot do this so they are all instinct. However, it is far from clear this is true.

There is an alternative view, studied by anthropologist Tim Ingold, that says meaning happens in an interaction between the environment and all living things within it. Ingold argues that thinking is only possible because we exist in the environment. We are the environment, just like everything else within it, not above it. Thought is not something that exists outside of the world in a theoretical “mind”. As a result, thinking and meaning is not reserved for humans, Humans are simply the only creatures that can narrate their experience.

By this perspective the world is not inside-out. Pressure is something that exists in more than individual humans. There is no mind external to the environment. The advice to let go of thinking becomes impossible to follow: You may as well say “don’t exist in the world” or “don’t have a body”.

However, even if the book may be underpinned by a flawed assumption (and it may not, depending on your perspective), many of the recommendations can still be applied by coaches and players.

• You don’t need to feel good to play well (and you don’t need to play well to feel good).

• Focus on the process of mastering skills rather than outcomes like wins and trophies.

• Learn how to get unhelpful thinking out the way and trust your instincts.

• Accept that you are not your thoughts or feeling and you have a choice of how you behave.

As far as I am aware, none of these ideas depend on an inside-out underpinning.

A second critique of the book is related. The book argues that running on instinct is the preferable state. While it often is, it isn’t always true.

Now, Perform Beyond Pressure, does not totally throw away reflection. It talks about learning from mistakes in the drive towards mastery. This is great advice. However, it may be difficult for some to put into action if they are coming at it from a framing device that says meaning is self-created.

Despite some personal reservations, Perform Beyond Pressure is a well argued and accessible book with plenty of practical advice for coaches and players alike to frame their performance. I recommend it if you are looking for a way to play and coach better cricket, while also meditating on some deeper aspects of how you frame your sporting experiences.

Soft Ball Cricket Isn’t Soft

Here’s an opinion that is widely held:

“if you’re not preparing your players for hardball cricket, you’re letting them down, frankly. You’re condemning them to never being able to play in a proper game.”

Today, I want to challenge this view. Soft ball cricket isn’t soft.

Soft ball cricket isn’t just for kids. Soft ball cricket isn’t improper cricket. Soft ball cricket doesn’t stop players developing.

Yet, every summer I hear the cry from kids - aged somewhere between 9 and 13 - “can we play hard ball?”. Playing soft ball is a terrible fate to these boys. So, why don’t we just give them their wish and break out the cricket balls?

Form of life

In the Caribbean and Pakistan, tapeball - a form of cricket played without a hard cricket ball - is a recognised and respected format played in streets and on beaches by anyone, and also to a high standard. Street cricketers have famously become internationals. For example Malinga and Pollard.

No one in these places says tape ball isn’t proper cricket. It’s just part of the culture, or what some call form of life.

If culture - rather than enjoyment or development - is the only reason why we don’t play as much tape ball here in the UK, then its a cultural issue more than anything else. You can educate your way to more soft ball cricket.

Assuming this is true, why would we want to change the culture?

The ball is a constraint

Playing with a 5 and a half ounce cricket ball is the most realistic way to play the game. It’s what the pros do. That doesn’t mean it’s the most suitable in all circumstances.

In constraints-led coaching we think of the ball as a constraint. It affords opportunities for action that differ depending on the type of ball.

In skill development, a tape ball (a tennis ball half taped with electrical tape) swings. It affords batsman the chance to play against the hooping ball. It also gives bowlers the chance to work out how to bowl when the ball swings.

Games with “windballs” or “velocity” balls (plastic balls with a moulded seam) can be played quickly and don’t require pitches. They work at any age. You can experiment with tactics and your mental game in far less time. Soft ball helps a lot if you want to replay a scenario a few times in a short period.

From an enjoyment view, a plastic ball is a great option. Ask yourself what people say when they say they don’t like playing cricket. Chances are it’s “boring” or “the ball is too hard”. So why not play a faster moving format with a ball that’s easier to field without worrying about fingers?

We already know it works from the tapeball games around the world.

Yes, this format isn’t for the traditionalists, but what harm does it do to traditional cricket if tapeball it brings more people to the game?

No more “soft” ball

Due to these advantages, I want to lobby to change the image of “soft” ball cricket. In my environment at least.

“Soft ball” is the wrong statement. It suggests they are for the soft people who can’t handle the hard ball like a real man can. You might say it’s just a name, but there is meaning in a name.

I’m going to try to repackage non-cricket balls as training aids and a different format instead. It’s not childish or weak to use a different ball or a different format, it’s just another way to achieve your intention.

Let’s try something like this,

• Soft ball formats can be called tapeball cricket, street cricket or velocity cricket.

• Soft balls in training can be called simply practice balls or street balls. Or they could be named after the affordances they open up; tactical balls or swing balls.

Who’s with me?

What if Basics Don’t Exist?

Mastering the basics” is a long-standing pillar of cricket coaching. I want to challenge the idea because I think removing it will lead to more effective cricketers.

Most of us have been brought up that nailing the basics equals success. I remember being a kid reading and re-rereading my coaching manual, knowing it contained all the answers.

The idea is simple and intuitive: the basics provide a template. Copy what works. No need to reinvent the wheel. Play straight. Sure, there is some natural variation but the basics are always at the core. They are the spelling and grammar of cricket.

We can see this at the highest level. TV commentators criticise technical flaws (against a template) in every player. When they fail we see this as the cause. When they succeed we see the player as finding a way to compensate in spite of this basic error.

We also see it when coaching. We use the basics template to tell players how to bat, bowl and field. If they get it wrong, they need to identify and correct their errors through hard work. You can add flair, but not until these basics are firmly in place and the flaws ironed out.

For many of us, these basics - and the underpinning assumptions behind them - are so ingrained as to be self-evident common sense.

The problem is, we don’t know if there are any basics. 

Templates

Basics can be thought of as fixed, universal templates: by their nature they exist outside of any context. They are supposed to work all the time, that’s why they are called basics. 

This is also the problem. Skills don’t ever exist out of context.

Every time we play a match, there is an ever-shifting context: Format and stage of the match; tactics, mindset and form of players; type and state of the ball; and conditions including pitch, weather and boundaries.

Can you see the problem?

There are no basics that apply in all possible circumstances.

And if basics are supposed to be fixed and universal - or even close to universal - then how can they exist?

Of course, not everyone agrees with this logic. There are valid counter-arguments. Let’s put those aside and commit to a thought exercise: How do we coach if it’s true there are no fixed, universal basics?

It’s here the constraints-led approach (CLA) to coaching becomes compelling. Instead of correcting errors against a template, the CLA focuses on players exploring different possibilities, then honing in on what works in their context. 

Sometimes this approach can looks very similar to “coaching the basics”. Often it looks very different and it always feels different to the participants who are no longer instructed towards an ideal, but instead invited and guided to develop a solution that works in context.

How do you coach if basics don’t exist?

So you have a group you want to coach and now you are struggling to know what to do because you have been convinced about no basics.

What the heck do we do now?

First we ask,

• What does success look like?

• What can we realistically shoot for?

• What might stop us getting there?

Unlike fixed templates, intentions are one of the core pillars a constraints-led approach. An intention may look very much like a basic, especially if it is a movement such as “have a balanced approach to the crease”. The difference is that adaptability is built in, not added on.

Next we establish where they are at the moment.

Play some modified games and see if they need to establish a technique (probably if total beginners) or adapt what they have. Different players will likely be at different stages.

Based on this we decide on the practice options: 

• Representativeness and variability?

• What constraints?

• How we will measure success?

At early stages, success may be as simple as bowling with a straight arm and making contact with the ball, but this will quickly change. The factors above need to change with it.

Incidentally, constraints are ways to direct attention towards available opportunities to act. This is “constrain to afford”. Constraints can be points systems, types of bat and ball, verbal instructions, pitch length and surface type. Tweak them towards your intention.

From these options we choose the actual practices.

With beginners this will likely be simplified versions of the game that contain variability (repetition without repetition). They likely won’t contain broken down skills in isolation, unless there is a very strong reason.

One example is “catchy shubby”; a game that looks a lot like cricket that rewards effort and gives players repetitions in batting, bowling and fielding. You learn a lot about skill and motivation levels if you play this for 15 minutes.

If we are thinking more technical, rather than drilling movement we can net and use points to direct attention: a point for contact, a point moving past a chalk line to illustrate not “getting stuck on the crease”, a point if you can hold the finish position for three seconds.

Don’t like the outcomes? Work with the players to adjust the constraints and try again.

This manipulation of constraints affords players the option to explore and adapt without a specific template. The more tightly you constrain, the more it helps beginners.

As we move through our practices towards our intentions, we assess each of these stages and adapt the environment based on success. As we remove constraints we get closer to the full game with players with robust, adaptable skills.

Get Your Goldilocks Reps In

Repetitions are important: The more you practice a skill, the better you get.

However, not all reps are equal.

In cricket, a vertical bat drive practice “rep” might be hitting a ball off a tee, facing a bowling machine, facing a bowler in a net or facing a bowler in a middle. Every one you hit the ball, but they are not the same either.

Total beginners will benefit from a reduction in difficulty that hitting from a tee brings. You can can also hit a lot of balls in 15 minutes off a tee. A lot more than in a middle practice. However, hitting from a tee means you lose key elements of the game. The the ball is stationary. There are no fielders. There is no match pressure.

This means that knowing your intention is important before starting to do reps.

Learning a new movement? You’re more likely to look at low-representative practice in blocks until the pattern is locked. Sometimes this is called “repetition after repetition”.

Trying to use a learned skill in a game situation? You’ll turn up the representativeness (make it more like the game) and increase variability so you have to decide when and how you will adapt the skill. Sometimes this is called “repetition without repetition”.

Rather than just thinking in pure rep numbers, coaches and cricketers can focus more on the practice method that suits their current needs.

More is only better if you are being challenged by the difficulty level.

Nick Winkelman calls this “the goldilocks principle”; practice methods that are not too easy or not too hard are just right to push improvements.

So get your reps in.

Just make them Goldilocks reps.

The Power of Points

We keep score in sport with the aim to outscore the opposition. Football has goals, rugby has points and cricket has runs and wickets.

In games these are the scoring systems we use, but in training we can adjust the points to help us better reach our goals.

It’s something I’ve noticed coaches do naturally when they want to direct focus in a game situation. Rugby coaches I work with five extra points from scoring a try on the wing, for example.

Regardless of your underpinning opinions about how to coach, such points have a role to play. In my world of ecological dynamics, we call it “constraining to afford” which is a fancy way of saying you’re using points to direct players attention to help them come up with a solution they can use in the real game.

In cricket, modified points are a powerful constraint because you can use them in a middle practice that looks like a game: You set a challenge and allow players to explore solutions to the problem.

Types of points

In my experience there are a few systems that work in cricket:

• Penalties. A “stick” system to discourage certain play, like -5 runs for a wicket. You can also give the opposition runs instead.

• Bonus runs. “Carrots” to encourage play. For example double runs for a straight hit.

• Bowling runs. Bowlers (and fielders) carrot runs for their team. For example, bowling a maiden gets 5 runs for your team.

• Points competitions. Batsmen and bowlers have different points and the first to reach the set score wins (like 21s).

• Nominated points. Bowlers or batsmen can nominate certain balls to get extra points if the succeed or lose points if they fail.

Points as constraints

There are lots of examples of games modified by points constraints. And, in fact, using points is so easy you can create your own with little effort.

To get you going, here's one called FIT cricket with an intention to develop running between the wickets.

Here are some other examples I have used.

• creating a chain of scoring shots (or dots as a bowler)

• hitting length as a bowler

• direct hit run outs

• wides and no balls

• ball hit in certain area (often straight hit)

• ball hit in "banned" area

• ball hit on ground

• diving stop

• wickets

• boundary first or last ball over over

• close catch

• play and miss

• edged

• retaining wickets for a set time

Pick ones that best fit your intention for the session and get playing.

Be a Goldfish: The Wisdom of Ted Lasso

“Let’s be sad now, let’s be sad again, then we can be a gosh darn goldfish. On. Forward.”

— Ted Lasso

Ted Lasso is a joyful show. If you have not seen it, you should watch it. 

You should watch it for many reasons, not least for the wisdom of the eponymous coach. In the quote above his team have lost but Ted taps into a deeper meaning than the result of one game.

You can play out of your skin and lose. You can be the best you can be and still not get the result. That’s sport. That’s life. But as Ted says, you drop the baggage an move forward.

Like a goldfish.

Earlier in the series Ted talks about why he is a coach. He says  “success is not about the wins and losses, its about helping these young fellas being the best version of themselves. It ain’t always easy, but neither is growing up without someone believing in you.”

If that’s your motivation - your reason why - then why would the result matter?

Take a moment to accept the pain you feel at losing, then drop it, remember why you’re here in the first place and get back to work.

Thanks Ted.

Better Cricket Thinking

Thinking is sport is a complicated thing. 

Elite batsmen are not “thinking” when playing a ball at 90 mile per hour, but they can still play the ball. Things happens too fast when the ball is rushing at you as a batsman or fielder, or you’re trying to adjust to a soft surface as a bowler.

Yet its not all instinct either. Cricketers become better the more they learn to focus on the right thing at the right time. That is where thinking comes in: learning to direct attention.

How do you do that?

As a player, imagine you are in nets playing a game like 21s and the coach calls you in, saying “what did you notice?”

Don’t say the first thing that comes into your head in a panic. The coach who asks what you noticed is not likely to to be one looking for a specific answer. So don’t shout “communication” and pray it’s right.

Also, don’t worry if  you can’t think of anything. The coach will likely try to guide you to an answer from your perspective. You can’t be wrong if you’re honest.

Instead take a moment to consider what you were focusing on, and answer honestly. It will open a discussion between you and the opponent (batsman or bowlers). 

You might also hear the coach say “what else?”.

Maybe the coach will call on you when you haven’t volunteered an answer. Have your thinking done just in case. It’s unlikely the coach is trying to catch you out.

What about if you’re the coach?

As a coach, we all remember times when players look at you like you just landed from Mars. So nip that in the bud:

• Ask players to get into small groups and discuss the answer before it’s given

• Tell players not to give the first answer, but instead think about it.

• Tell players it’s OK not to know and that you will work it out together.

• Get different people to answer the question first.

• As follow up questions like “what else?” of others, especially those who don’t speak much.

The key is, both players and the coach need to work to use thinking time to actually think. Then we can all quickly get back to playing.

Thanks to Doug Lemov for some of these ideas, taken from the excellent The Coach’s Guide to Teaching.

The GROW Model for Cricket

Although underused, reflection is a key part of a cricketer improving.

Recently I was reminded of the GROW model of reflection that works to help players hone in on what to do (and helps coaches do the same of their coaching).

What GROW is for

GROW can be used to reflect in a number of different contexts:

1. In a session, when you want to quickly review how things are going.

2. In a session, when you want to delve more deeply into what to do next.

3. In a game, to get a sense of what to do next tactically.

4. After a block of sessions or matches to reflect and decide what to do in the next block.

5. By the coach when planning a session or block of sessions around a specific goal or learning outcome.

GROW can be quick (20-30 seconds live in a session) or slow (an hour or more in a block review). It’s flexible but powerful. It is often used as a way to remove weaknesses but it is equally powerful in reinforcing strengths.

How to use GROW in cricket

Here’s the basics:

1. Goal: What are you trying to achieve and are you committed to it 100%?

2. Reality: What is the current situation? What’s happening?

3. Options: What can we do to change things? How can we make the reality match the goal?

4. What next?: Which option do we pick?

This is flexible and can come out in a lot of ways, however here is an example from a training session; A young cricketer is bowling in the nets to a batsman. You call them over mid-net and ask:

Coach: “What are you working on?” (Goal)

Player: I’m trying to get the batsman to look to drive so I can nick them off

C: “What have you noticed?” (Reality)

P: “The ball is swinging and they have edged it low a couple of times. I think I am on top but they have also middled a few. and they know how to leave me”

C: “What can you do different?” (Options)

P: “Uhm, well, I could pitch it up a bit more, or maybe try to bowl some cross seam so it doesn’t swing away and makes it harder for them to judge what to leave.”

C: “Which one will you try?” (What next)

P: “I’ll bowl a few cross seam in the next few balls.”

C: “Great, show me!”

This is one example, but the real strength for me is the flexibility. If you ever struggle with how to start a review, use GROW to give you a framework and get more done more quickly.

Warm Up the Brain for Cricket Practice with an Intention

One of the first things to ask players at training is some variation of “what’s your intention?”.  It’s good practice. It gets players focused by giving meaning. It stops both coach and player going through the motions.

However, often players don’t know how to answer the question and end up with vague answers that is a guess as to what the coach wants to hear.

Worse, if they are bad at defining the intention, players can take longer than they want and get bored and irritated at the lack of activity. One answer is for the coach to decide the intention. This works, yet I feel the ultimate goal is to support players to be able to do it themselves. 

How do we get there?

A useful intention is similar to a goal. It needs to be specific, measurable and realistic. I would add that it is externally-based rather than internal in most cases. Most crickters overanalyse technique and forget about actually performing. 

If the answer you get doesn’t seem very SMART, you have some work to do.

Follow up

Let’s say you get an answer like “I just want to get back into it and hit some balls”. This is a classic line that sounds like an intention. 

It isn’t.

Follow up with something like,

• “OK, can you be more specific, what do you want to get out of hitting balls?”

• “How will you know you have been successful, what does it look like?”

• “How long do you need to do that before you move on to something else?”

• “If you could put a number on that, what would it be?”

The follow up questions depend on how clear the intention was, but you get the idea; you’re trying to tease out a more robust answer that sets up the session.

The magic question - the one you ask when you just don’t know what else to ask - is “what does success look like?”

Dealing with resistance

By this point, players can get fed up. Eye-rolling and impatience kicks in with some players. They want to “just start”. Others decide not to try and disengage waiting for the coach to finish talking and not answering questions. Some get disruptive, making unhelpful comments and starting side conversations.

How you deal with this depends on the makeup of the group (personality, age, experience and so on). Most will be motivated by starting the activity so focusing on that is helpful. Others have different motivations, so you have to be flexible.

Click here for some ideas on different motivations and how to handle them

One trick that may work is calling the intention a “mental warm up”. Players understand the need to warm up to be physically and mentally ready, so “warming up your brain” with some thinking is intuitive.

The more you work with a group or player and demand an effective intention, the better they get at setting one. So, stick at it and you’ll see results.

How to Deal with Unhelpful Behaviour when Coaching Cricketers

I just finished reading Surrounded by Idiots, a book about personality. I didn’t agree with much of it as it is based on some flaky ideas about behaviour. However, there were some useful points.

The main element was to emphasise how people are different, and should be treated differently depending on how they react. This seems solid and uncontroversial. It comports with my experience.

So, inspired by this message, here are some of the unhelpful reactions you see when coaching. As a coach, learning to deal with them will help you get to coaching more quickly.

A quick note with all of these behaviours; once you have identified people who do them, agree these behaviours are not helpful and use the rule of three to make it a two-way street where the player is working on stopping them before they become disruptive.

Not engaged

A lot of people have a quiet, laid-back character. They enjoy many of the aspects of sport, but novelty is not one of them. They don't like to do things differently and will resist (through inaction) doing much of anything unless they know exactly how it’s going to work. This is not a flaw, it's just how they are wired. They like traditional ways, they like drilling and they like instruction.

This can come across as avoiding conflict, being passive-aggressive or slow to start things because they need a lot of clarity about what's going to happen.

When you understand this motivation, you can adapt to it: Do activities that are familiar. Build in time to explain new activities. Remind these players why an activity is important and the positive benefits it will give them.

If you give feedback, remember they will try to ignore it. Don't let them, ask them how they will act on it then follow up.

Self-critical

Related to being laid-back is the ability to be highly self-critical. Those who say "I can't do it" or "I never get anything right" then give up and refuse to participate.

This requires a long term switch of mindset. However, in the short term, you can get them moving with a simple, old-fashioned praise sandwich. Tell them something they are doing well, agree something they can do better, then finish with something else they are doing well.

This does two things. First it provides a feeling of security that it’s not all bad. They are not failures. Second, it switches the focus from being a terrible person to changing behaviour. The player has something concrete to focus on, and can attempt to do it for the rest of the session.

Dominating

We all know players who try to control everything. They bowl more than anyone in the nets by jumping the line. They bat longer by taking the turn of more passive players. They talk more than anyone in the huddle, telling others what to do and acting as a proxy command-style coach.

They think this is fine as others just accept it.

The solution is simple; don’t let it happen.

Some players - and coaches - will accept the dominant character doing what they do. As coaches we need to step in. Get these players quickly into activity then make sure they are not “stealing balls” from others. In the huddle, make sure others get the chance to speak. If you don’t, a domineering player will take all the opportunities.

Impatient

If being passive is one problem, the opposite is also true: wanting to get to the game too quickly.

“Can we just hit balls” or “Can we play a proper match?” are questions that often come up, driven by an urgency to crack on with practice. These players see it as getting on with things, while others see these players as being too hasty when the team is unclear on what is happening.

While we don’t want to dally, there are times when coach-led explanations and demonstrations are needed. Proper review and reflection is also important but impatient players are resistant to it. At these times, the impatient players will cause friction - not listening, causing disruption and having arguments - which they won’t see as a problem.

When that happens, it’s important to make it clear why these pauses are important to the final outcome.

Then it’s important to get through explanations and reflections as efficiently as possible. Don’t get side-tracked. I often set a fixed time to reflect and plan and it’s never more than 30 seconds. Impatient players appreciate this.

The impatient ones will still get distracted easily, but you can help them tolerate the talking if you promise to keep chat to a minimum (and then do).

Blaming others

In team sports, it’s easy to avoid responsibility by pointing the finger. In younger people it it could be petty accusations (“he called me names”), with older groups it tends to be more task-focused (“you are bowling too many wides”) or wildly unspecific (“what ARE you doing?”). Whatever it is, the underlying point is to shift the blame onto someone else.

Similarly, other people are very focused on things being correct. If the perfectionist sees an error they feel obliged to correct it. They see it as being honest but it can come across as callous.

When this happens, treat it as an opportunity to teach how to deliver effective feedback. The process is:

1. Identify what happened and what influence this had on the task or other people in the group.

2. Tell the person clearly how you saw it.

3. Explain something they can do differently next time.

A technical example is “I’ve noticed you try and hit straight balls to the leg side and get bowled, could you try and hit them straighter?”. A behaviour example is “when you chat when it’s your turn to bowl I get fewer balls to face and that is frustrating. Could you bowl when it’s your turn?”.

The key is the separate the behaviour from the person. Feedback is not, as some assume, a judgement of your entire character as a human.

Honesty is vital but so is a genuine desire to help a team mate improve (rather that cause friction, upset or correct an error for the sake of perfectionism). Deliver feedback with sensitivity and accuracy and you have a shot at getting it right.

Rejecting feedback

Giving effective feedback is a skill. Accepting feedback is equally difficult to get right. There are a number of possible deflections:

• Ignoring it

• Feeling persecuted

• Angry denial

• Not believing it

Whatever the reaction, the trick is to take the opportunity to teach - and reteach - how to accept feedback.

1. Listen to what is being said and accept it as a genuine attempt to help.

2. Acknowledge feedback has been given and accepted.

3. Act on the feedback as soon as possible.

Ideally every player will know their common reactions to feedback so they understand what to do. Even if they don’t know, they can stick to the “3A” process to avoid the anger, denial or persecution complex.

Arguments

Some players are masters at the unhelpful disagreement. There are a few reasons for this, and understanding the motivation for an argument changes how you deal with each one.

A common sticking-point is arguing over rules or game formats. Some people are sticklers for the details and want every last eventuality to be agreed. Others - as we know - want to “just play”. The former will discuss until the cows come home while the latter are happy to become aggressive to stop all the - as they see it - pointless talk.

Challenge aggressive behaviour (such as talking over each other) immediately and make sure it’s a clear expectation teammates stay on topic and listen to each other.

Personally, I find this very difficult to enforce as it happens so much, especially with teenagers in a school setting with multiple motivations. Despite a clear expectation, many can’t help themselves. I am often challenging a lack of respectful group communication. Patience helps as kids take time to learn effective behaviour. So do smaller group discussions, sanctions and positive reinforcement with some players (not everyone though). I have also had success with running sessions that focus mainly on communicating. For example, setting a stopwatch on how long we can go in a huddle without an interruption.

Another area of conflict is those players who are more socially-focused and less task driven. These players don’t see the issue, but it annoys those who want to get going and arguments can result. More on the social players in a moment.

Meanwhile, keep the discussion as relevant as possible, understanding that some people want a bit longer than others. No-one is wrong, they just have different tolerances and need to respect each other.

Finish with clearly agreed game rules and behaviours. Be clear on the rewards for success and the consequences for unacceptable behaviour. Also remember, no method is totally effective as group motivations vary so much. It’s always going to be trial and error until you get a handle on player motivations in each group.

Distraction

Some players like to talk more than play because they enjoy the interaction more than the sport. They are the ones who try to joke around or get off-topic during a huddle. These players love to be popular and the centre of attention. To them monologues and side comments are not a distraction, they are the best part of the session.

Others react either by getting annoyed and telling these players to get on with it or passively giggling at the antics. Either way, the session becomes more about the chat than the cricket.

Environment is so important to these players, your role as coach is to help them create a happy, friendly place while also learning the boundaries and tolerances of those with more of a task focus. As a good coach you can find time for stories, jokes and being social but it can’t disrupt the session too far. Social secretaries need to earn the right to chat. Each group will be different so there is no set solution as to how far this goes. A recreational team having their weekly net and a catch up can tolerate much more social time than an academy with hopeful professionals (although both sides need both task and social elements).

That said, socially-driven players always need reminding that a task-focus and becoming more successful as a result is a great way to make them popular. There is a “win-win” for everyone.

When the jokes get distracting, saying something like “I feel like everyone would like it better if we made the fun by playing” helps the focus without criticising the person. Just beware, as these players can also be very sensitive to perceived criticism. Remember, they don’t chat as a problem, they see it as the point.

Once again, clearly agreed behaviours are your friend as they can be referred back to if the chat goes too far.

Martyr complex

Linked to distractions (above) are players who don’t recognise their unhelpful behaviour, then act the martyr when they are called out for it.

Remember these players are mainly driven by being social. Any rejection of these efforts (no matter how unhelpful their behaviour to a session) makes them feel unloved and disrespected. They blame others, saying they are being persecuted in some way. For example, “She doesn’t like me so she’s deliberately bowling wides”. They become a helpless victim in their own minds. They disengage with the session.

Regardless of the facts, this is how the player feels. As coaches we often try to come to the rescue and solve the problem, but this just further feeds the victim mentality.

Instead deal with it by,

1. Address the behaviour of the martyr. If they are outside of agreed behaviour (stopping to chat, sitting down, complaining) remind them what you agreed and ask if they are still able to do this.

2. When the martyr starts their victim talk (“he’s got it in for me, there’s nothing I can do”), remind them they cannot control the behaviour of others, only themselves. Get back to their behaviour agreement.

3. Finish with practical steps they agree to take and get back to the session. It’s important the player buys into the next action or they will think you are also a persecutor and will continue to resist (although their tactics may change to make it look like they are not resisting).

Asking for details

Another common trait is wanting as much detail as possible. I’m sure you can think of a player who has a million questions in the huddle. They don’t want to start until they fully understand everything. This can become counter-productive as you have trouble getting to the action. More impatient types get annoyed while more passive and chatty players are happy for the questions to be asked as it delays the start.

If the team you coach has these players you need to come prepared. Answer questions as accurately as possible and don’t try to blag it. They want the facts not vague ideas. Don’t spend too much time explaining why it’s important, instead explain that while details matter, being too slow will prevent the session being effective.

The good news is the detailed question asker is usually very task focused. They want to do a perfect job so they are thinking it through thoroughly. This is to be applauded. You just need to rein in the extremes.

Conclusions

Unhelpful behaviours stem from multiple motivations. These often compete such as those you like to chat compared with those who like to act. As a coach it’s impossible to get to the bottom of every motivation and adapt yourself to the needs of the team. You also need buy-in from players to learn to adapt as well.

By using the tools above, coupled with trying to work out individual motivations, we start better meeting the needs of players and have a chance of running better sessions as coaches.

For me personally, this working out how to be as effective as possible with real people is what makes coaching so rewarding and important a job.

21s: An Adaptable Cricket Game for Skill Development

Twenty ones is a simple, effective and scalable net/middle practice game designed to get players competing, thinking and improving. I’ve been tweaking the format recently, so wanted to share what is working in my cricket sessions with kids of various ages.

Here’s how it works.

The basic game

The mission of the game is to be the first to score 21 points between batsman and bowler.

The basic game can be played in nets. ideally it’s played in a hall or middle practice. It can be played in teams (fielding and batting) or one batsman against one bowler.

Points are allocated in any way to fit the needs of the session, but a standard template is something like,

Batting

• 4 pts: boundary

• 2 pts: run

• 1 pt: no wicket for 10 balls

Bowling

• 10 pts: wicket

• 3 pts: maiden

• 2 pts: play and miss

• 1 pt: dot ball

This can be customised easily.

For longer formats, defensive play can be rewarded (points for surviving, leaving and so on). For short formats, things like dot chains and boundary-single combos could be the focus. It’s totally flexible.

It’s simple and competitive to do this with the resources you have available to you and it turns nets and middle practice into a testing-style practice. 

If you stop there you still have a great, flexible game for most level of player.

But you can layer it up further too. 

Much of the below is taken from the work of Amy Price and the Video Games Approach.

Upgrade 1: Pauses

A “pause” is a way of giving players greater control over their own games on a technical and tactical level, and it dovetails perfectly with the 21s format. 

The pause gives players the chance to think, reflect then act. This is often missed in  practice. However, once you see realistic situations emerge from the interactions caused by pausing, you see the benefits.

Pauses work by giving each team the ability to pause the game and make a change. I usually give each team 2 pauses per game.

The reason for a pause is one of:

1. The game format is not working and needs to change. The rules can be changed.

2. The team is behind and need an advantage. A cheat can be brought in.

3. The team is ahead and needs more of a challenge.

4. The team are unsure what to do so need a tip or a clue.

5. The team want to focus on a specific phase of play and so call a replay to try again to do better.

I let players call a pause when they want. I tell them can only use the cheat once. Otherwise everyone cheats all the time.

I also call coach-led pauses if I see something that needs further reflection or a rule change.

Upgrade 2: Power Ups

Power ups are temporary advantages that change the nature of the game. I like these because they are both fun and provide a different challenge to players: The environment shifts so their techniques and tactics need to adapt.

Power ups are given at 8 points. They usually last an over. You can be flexible on this.

Here are some examples:

• Batsmen get 2 points for hitting the ball in a certain area

• Batsman gets immunity for a certain type of wicket (e.g. bowled)

• Batsman gets a point for any drop and run singles

• Batsman can change the field

• Bowler has to bowl off two steps only

• Batsmen must try to score in area allocated by bowler

• Batsmen have to run every contact

• Automatic loss for batsman if a wicket falls (out means out)

• Bowler gets a point for hitting length

• Bowler gets a wicket if a maiden is bowled

• Bowler gets 5 points of the batsmen hits the ball at catchable height

• Double points for any skill

• Fielders get a point for saving a run (stopping an attacking shot)

You can make up plenty more and allocate them or get players to choose one that matches their needs.

Upgrade 3: Levels

At the end of the game, you have a winner and the winner progress to a higher “level”. This means the challenge gets harder for the winners in the next round. Each win changes the rules in some way.

Examples of level changes I have used are:

• Power up at 10, 11 or 12 points

• All pauses must be used by players

• Fewer points (e.g. 7 points for a wicket)

• Change of points (e.g. batsmen don’t get survival points but do get points for chains of scoring shots)

• Adding point options (e.g. landing a yorker, playing a higher risk shot, points for fielding)

• Extra pauses for the opposition 

• Coach points for exceptional play

• No coach pauses

• Only nominated players can score certain points (e.g. tail enders only get points for boundaries, only part time bowlers can get wicket points)

• Opposition start with points or power ups

You can have as many levels as you see fit, although in an hour most people don’t get past level 3. To counter this, you can allow players or teams to “save” and take their progress to the next session. 

Summary of cricket Twenty Ones game

21s is a flexible net and small sided game format for cricket that focuses on competitive practice. It uses gamification techniques to motivate players and improve techniques.

Additional gamification tools - that add to the format’s effectiveness - are Pauses (for reflective and cognitive skills), Power Ups (for engagement and building pressure) and Levels (to match skill to challenge).

Although it seems complex to manage, it engages players in the game and affords the chance to develop technical and tactical skills alongside decision-making, reflective practice, communication and teamwork skills, and resilience.

Just

“I just want to get back into it”

“I just want to hit some balls”

Just is a four letter word.

I have to try hard not to roll my eyes when it comes from the lips of a player I coach. “Just” is a cop-out. It usually means we are in for an undirected session where boredom or frustration or both set in quickly for the player. I’ve seen it dozens - maybe hundreds - of times.

The frame of mind a “just” player brings to a session locks you in. You can’t explore and adapt if you “just hit balls”.

(Well you can, but first you need to drop the “just”.)

You can’t test yourself under pressure if a player just has a net. Unless nets are designed to test you, they won’t.

So I urge all players to change their attitude to practice and I urge all coaches to challenge the word “just”. It’s unhelpful and can be replaced by a more competitive mindset.