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,
Check understanding in the game.
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;
What players noticed
What options they had
What choice they made (was it the most effective one?)
How well they did (outcome)
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.