Planning for Club Coaching

Planning is about realism, but also needs a pinch of idealism.

This is the conclusion I have come to during my recent planning of summer training for West of Scotland Cricket Club. The recent snow and cancelled sessions have got me in planning mode, as I have done for the last three summers at West.

I used to plan based on the ideal: It won’t rain much, most people will attend most sessions, match availability will be abundant, everyone will want to do exactly what I plan when I plan it. Players are happy to try new ways of training. There will be as much energy at the end of the summer as there is in April. This wasn’t realistic.

Now I plan based on these key variables: 

• Give as many players as possible as many chances as possible to play under match conditions. However, availability for training and matches will be wildly varied.
• Players prefer to play games than come to training, and most will choose matches over training. 
• Training is well attended for the first few weeks, tails away as midweek matches start (West are in five midweek competitions and a Sunday cup), has a short recovery in July before tailing away to virtually nothing by the end of August.
• Home midweek games and rain need different sessions to “normal” sessions.
• Every playing member will get the chance to train, but those more open to being pushed at training will get more attention. Coachable players get coached!
• Many players love the default (nets and fixed fielding drills with high volume) and rarely engage with anything else. This is especially true when deciding what to do as a group.

With these constraints, I have build a plan that is flexible. It looks complicated because it has so many options, but in reality, I will just pick the most suitable one and run with it. It’s realistic and idealistic.

Realism isn’t an excuse for pessimism though. In the past I have let the failures of sessions get to me and we end up in “default net” mode because players were not engaged with the session. Perhaps that was my fault, perhaps the players were not coachable enough that day. Whatever the reason, these things happen. My goal for the year is to work as hard as possible to inspire people to be better than the default. With that in mind, my big focus for changes to training is,

• Building team spirit and improvement mindset into sessions as well as games.
• Bringing training closer to matches.
• Offering constraints-led drills and skill work, especially in the field.

Of course, these are ideals and not every box will be ticked at every session. That said, the more I can convince players do these things, the better it will be for the club. For example, I know a lot of players tend to dislike middle practice. However, also know well-run centre wicket work is one of the best ways to develop form and decision making skills.

That means I’ll try to do it as much as possible but need to understand the conditions need to be right. We need a practice wicket and the right number of players at the right standard. We need buy in from those participating, and an understanding it will be a lower volume session (which is OK). We need good weather and no home game that night. If these elements align, the session may still fail (unforeseen lack of attendance, snap shower, players not fully bought in). Or it may work like a charm and we all get something from it.

The point is, it’s my job to try, review and try again.

As a result, my plan is flexible but looking to stretch those who want to be stretched. It fights against the default “just hitting balls” mindset, but is also aware sometimes that’s the best you can do. My ideal is West are better than the default, my realism means I’m ready for when we are not. I’ll always strive to push West onward though, and this plan is the foundation of that realistic ideal. 

If you want more details about the planning process for club cricket, drop me a line for a chat. 

The Fast Bowler Training Question

Pace coach Steffan Jones recently said net bowling “is of no benefit to the pace bowler”.

While I broadly agree, I also think it’s a problem that is not easy to solve. Mainly because bowlers want to bowl in nets. Most bowlers love to bowl. They have relatively few chances, so when they get a session they tend to bowl as long as possible.

As a coach you can monitor this, but only in your sessions. What if the bowler you coach works with others? What if they go to nets with their mates and just bowl for hours because they are having fun? This happens all the time.

It’s the slightly older version of running a session with six year olds with clever designed warm up, session goals and cool down only to see them run back onto the outfield for two more hours after you finish.

Steff’s solution is great: heavy and light bowling days, combined with properly organised nets where bowlers bowl in spells that reflect game time. I encourage all coaches to build sessions like this. I’d love to see it. I also know that it is never going to happen outside my sessions. Certainly not at club or school level.

I think the best we can do as coaches is to build environments where players can work with these solutions, try them out and see how they work. We can structure sessions effectively to show players a useful path.

I think we can build a culture in the teams we coach of care for the fast bowler. We can help the team understand their own bowlers needs, and work to make sure they are met as well as possible.

But we must also remember that bowlers gonna bowl when the coaching shackles are off: Especially if they are kids, or adults with no intention of playing professionally. Bowling is fun, a way of letting off steam and a way to challenge themselves. They ask themselves, why would they bowl less or in such a restrictive way?

I’m not knocking Steff, he’s doing great work in a specific environment where he has more control and can do more like this. But I do wonder even in the most controlled situations, do all players stick totally to the plan?

Players certainly don’t stick to any plan I try for long. My conclusion after years of trying is to unclench. By all means, try it, but don’t panic if it turns out to be rejected by the players. It may work brilliantly, it may not. Only the players can decide what works for them because they are the only consistent presence in their game development.

I know some coaches will argue we know best so players should listen. I used to argue that too. Personally, I can’t hold that worldview any longer. Not with any integrity. For me it came for a place of ego and a need to control things I can’t control. For me it came from an impossible idea; that one coach can have total influence over a group of players. For me, I have realised that is impossible. For me it also came from a deep fear: If the coach can’t instruct any more, what is the job of the coach at all? Are we all just snake-oil salesmen?

Of course not.

Knowledge is still power, but I think it’s less useful for coaches than it was before because knowledge is so easy to obtain these days.

Real coaching helps players get the best from themselves not through pouring knowledge into cricket player jugs. It comes from building great relationships, mindsets, cultures and environments where players feel comfortable to build, fail and build again. That’s way more complex and difficult to grab than telling players what to do based on the latest research.

But from my viewpoint, it’s the only thing that gives you a chance to be a great coach.

And this was supposed to be an article about session design for bowlers. Sometimes you need to look deeper.

Getting the Most from Net Sessions

One thing I have railed against for years is the idea of “standard nets”: The unthinking practice where you have a few bowlers, one batter and 10 minutes each.

Unrealistic.

In more recent times, I have started to realise the inevitable nature of this kind of net session, especially with teenage and adult players. While I have plenty of alternative strategies, I also think it’s not as unhelpful as I have suggested in the past. Plus, I’ve come to accept there’s not much I can do about it.

 Cricket net mentality

When I’m working with engaged, self-sufficient and coachable players in a group net, I notice a certain mentality. Players with this mindset do not need a coach nudge. They go in to bat with a specific aim in mind. They don’t need the bowlers to do anything, they work with what they have.

For example, last year the pro at West would net for 10 minutes against whoever was bowling (sometimes pretty average players). He would work on his footwork to spinners and how big a stride he was taking to seamers. He never got fed up and hit out. He played with patience and focus. He walked out thanking every bowler for their efforts. He made the most of the situation.

Compare that to the average group of club players.

When left to net, they bowl until it’s their turn to bat. They bat for a bit with no real goal then have a swing at the end. They walk out with a general feeling of it going well or badly. This latter group is in the vast majority, even with experienced, talented and skilful players.

In the worst cases, when the situation is challenging - like a tired net wicket that is hard to bat on - some players give up altogether and either swing until time is up or come out early.

Coach intervention

When I first started coaching full time in nets I tried very hard to come up with ways to prevent this unfocused thinking: Games, drills, removing nets, putting up incentives, whiteboard themes, one to one conversations and more. Every intervention was met with some success but always the same end result eventually: A return to standard nets.

I felt a lot of frustration about this, and tried even harder to help players find a focus. Some of these methods worked well but there was no universal solution. And I think over 10 years of trying with different teams has proven how hard default nets stick.

Really it was my ego getting bruised when I saw “failure”.

In fact, the default net stays default partly because it is a useful tool. When done right it works to,

• Allow players to focus on action-perception training with bat and ball (e.g. picking line and length).
• Develop mindset and mental skills around batting and bowling.
• Socialise and have fun with teammates (crucial in club cricket, not a thing to be avoided).
• Get a lot of players with efficient time on task.

It’s easy, comfortable, it broadly works. For these reason the shadow of the default net looms large.

The realisation

Recently I realised I had not been thinking about nets in the right way.

I can never make default nets vanish and replace them with something else because it’s too easy, too ingrained, too trusted by players who have had a lot of success in cricket. I saw it from their viewpoint; fixing something that is not broken. Perhaps even risking their form for some foolish new fangled way to train.

No wonder they don’t want to change.

No wonder I see net games break down the moment I stop scoring the game. No wonder most players can’t even focus enough to even tell me what they are working on when I ask. No wonder people have literally walked out of my middle practice sessions because they don’t get the safe feeling net.

In their mind, especially a group mind, nets feel good and work fine.

With this thought, I realised it’s not personal. It’s not about my coaching skills. It’s not my job to get frustrated when players don’t fit my methods and principles. That’s my ego talking. My job is to find ways that work for the players, even when that’s not always what I want to coach.

Of course, there are also many ways nets can be unhelpful to development.  It’s too easy to switch off. It’s not as realistic as middle practice or as focused as game based drills. You can’t work on technique.

However, they can be useful. More importantly, most players think they are useful in that group setting. And what’s the saying about bringing a horse to water?

Cricket net coaching 3.0

Where does this reality leave the coach’s role at group nets?

First and foremost, I think we have to develop a real understanding of the players we coach. What motivates them? What inspires them? How do they think? How do they act in a group and as a group? What do they think works to develop their game (if they even have enough desire to do so)? What do they need to do to improve?

The more we know, the more we can match net sessions to the players.

Sometimes those sessions will look a lot like traditional netting. Even when we know in our heart of hearts there are more useful and developmental ways of training. If we know a group are the type to resist, its time to rethink the plan. If we think we can push harder and get a response, then try.

I like to think one day I will coach a group who feel the same as me about default netting. But I can’t control that because it’s always the player’s choice to make as an individual and as a group. Conscious or unconscious, social loafing or individual motivation. Respect for the coach or not.

As coaches, we can inspire, set up options, motivate, grow culture, encourage mindful action, explain why thing work, understand character and build environments. But we can never make that final choice to engage. To be coachable.

So we need to accept nets will eventually default to the simplest option. Take the chance when it comes to offer more helpful things but remember it’s the player’s choice, not ours. That helps us accept when our methods are rejected. That helps us realise there is only so much we can do.

Sometimes a traditional net is helpful because everyone is engaged and motivated towards a target. Sometimes it’s unhelpful for development but helpful for having a laugh with mates. Sometimes it’s unhelpful busywork. That’s really up to the players, not us. Not matter how hard we try and take the lead.

In my mind now I have relaxed my sense of wanting to be in control. Of course there are things we can and should do: Understand the players, make an offer. View the outcomes and adjust. See where the players take us when we try.

We might not end up where we wanted, but we will have fun seeing how far we can go with people who trust us because they know how much we care.

In the end, cricket coaching is far more about helping and guiding people than getting nets right.

Isn’t it?

Net Practice: Mortal Combat (Finish Him!)

Here's a net game that ramps up the tactical, decision making and feeling of playing cricket. Also, it's named after a 90s computer game. Win-win!

The game requires a little bit of planning, but can work with four-six players in each net lane.

First, pick teams. You don't need even numbers (and people can even arrive late and still join in). Then decide on the duration of each innings and who is batting first.

Devise a scoring system. We used a variation on PGS zones with these points:

• 1pt - Hit bowler defined zone with attacking shot (attempt rewarded more than outcome).
• 4pt - Hit  different bowler defined zone with attacking shot (attempt rewarded more than outcome).
• -1pt - Play and miss on off side.
• -5pt - Out bowled, stumped, caught behind, skyed or caught and bowled.

Then play out the match!

As you can see, we kept score on the whiteboard.

The response was brilliant. Everyone was highly engaged with the session. The bowlers and batsmen were arguing over the finer points of the rules, the result really mattered! It also got players to think tactically with their batting and bowling, and forced batsmen to play shots they didn't think they could play in order to try and win.

It was creative, messy, fun and developmental. I was delighted!

Give it a go and see how the players you coach get on with it. Be prepared for some great challenging discussions to be had.

Coaching in Business Brings Out the Best in People

Why don’t we see more coaches in business?

A coach in sport helps players find ways to improve. In cricket that leads to runs and wickets. 

In business, that leads to profit.

Although the goal is different, the methods are the same. Coaches are in the people business. We are effective when we understand how people and teams tick, what motivates them and how to draw out the best in them. 

Coaching develops people

Managers in business, like captains in sport, are so constrained by the pressures of time they don’t get the chance to coach. Even though everyone from the MD to the team leader is effective and efficient with well drilled processes and policies, they know how much greater a well-coached team can be.

Like good cricket teams, coached and coachable businesses are not just skilled and efficient. 

They know attitude and mindset, although invisible, are crucial elements in success. They focus on personal growth, pride in a job well done, and constant effort even under heavy workloads.

They are aware of their thoughts and behaviours and work towards helpful actions. They understand when they are having unhelpful thoughts and quickly act to stop them from becoming unhelpful actions and behaviours.

They have a powerful team culture built on a spirit of togetherness that extends far beyond shared goals. It helps them feel part of something important and motivates on a deep level.

A coached and coachable business roots out mistrust and toxic behaviour itself - even if it is within the “rules” - because this team has their way of working: A culture that is clear and honest.

So why don’t we see more coaches?

Coaching isn't instructing

I think it’s an image problem.

Most people in business see a sports coach as a PE teacher from the 70s. The coach blows a whistle, makes people do laps and punishment and forces endless, repetitive drills on the cold winter pitch or sports hall.

I have coached for over 20 years. I don’t own a whistle. The only time the players I coach do laps is if they choose to do them to get fit. I don’t even really like drills as a way of coaching. At least, not the brainless repetition of most of them.

Coaches are not instructors any more.

The old-school coach image is wrong.

When you get coaching these days, it’s all about coaching. Coaching by centring on the coachee. Understanding and empathising with the goal of development:

• How you think.
• What you believe.
• What you feel.
• How you act.
• What you think, feel and do when you are at your best.
• What you want to change.
• How you are going to change.

Real-life coaching

Let me give you a couple of practical examples.

First, George. George is new to a business but has been around long enough to understand the company policies. He works hard and tows the line. He is not a star performer but he never does anything wrong. He wants to learn some new skills but is having trouble finding the time because real work and business pressures come first.

George gets the chance to work with the company coach once a week for half an hour. In that time the coach and George chat about his aims and goals. He clarifies his ambitions and plans how he might get there.

To his surprise, the coach also shadows George at work for a few days too. 

In the next meeting, the coach starts asking George about why he did things at certain times. George feels his brain hurting a little as he digs deeper into how he feels, what his underlying assumptions are about things, and where points of frustration creep in.

He kept an open mind. He wanted to improve.

Over a few sessions and a few shadow days, George starts to get a clearer picture of how he works and why he works that way. He is able to organise his time better as a result and finds time to upskill without significant impact on the business. His new found skills pay off with better, more consistent performance.

George’s example shows, with an open mind, coaching helps you give yourself the chance to be the best you can be, whatever your job.

The second example is Sara. Sara also works hard and toes the line. She has been around a bit longer than George and understands the company a little better. 

She is also seen a problem by her manager. She never “breaks the rules” but she often bends them as far as possible. She doesn’t fit the culture of the company. She arrives just before start time and leaves exactly on time every day. She takes every excuse to get away from work for a moment. She sometimes lets a good chat get in the way of real work. 

Because Sara never breaks any rules, she sees nothing wrong with what she is doing. She doesn’t agree with her manager and doesn’t want to change anything.

Sara notices when the coach is around but, at first, does not see any one to one time. The coach is often around the team; chatting, joining in team meetings, taking notes and having sessions with others on the team.

Eventually the coach gets to Sara for a meeting. There are a lot of questions about how and why Sara does things. She can’t always answer them. She feels defensive. Yet, over time, the coach helps her recognise her feelings and match them to what she wants. Together they find areas they can work on, points of conflict with the manager and rest of the team, and a deeper understanding of how to make positive changes without comprising the core of who Sara feels she is.

Sometimes the meetings are one to one, sometimes they have a team mate or two. Occasionally the manager joins in. The discussion and action plan is always guided by the coach. Even when feelings run high.

Sara starts to understand her role in the team, the culture of the company and her influence on others through her actions. She finds ways to fit in and become valuable while meeting her own needs.

These are the types of issues sports coaches deal with every day.

George and Sara are made up names, but their stories are the stories of players I have coached in a sporting context. I wasn’t in a suit in a company, I was in a tracksuit in a cricket net. 

Yet, people are still people whatever the context.

Beyond practical, into inspired

We tend to get drawn into the practical and immediate in both sport and business. The next sale, the next match.

Sometimes you need someone to get deeper, delve into the invisible soft side and help inspire people the be the best they can be. It leads to a better bottom line, just like it leads to more wins on the field.

Good coaching taps into this on a team and individual level.

To try coaching in your business, set up a meeting with me to find out how I can help.

Net Practice: Four Plus One Equals Five

I’m always searching for ways to improve club cricket net practice. The challenge is engaging players at the right level. This game is one I came up with after realising an area we rarely practice.

The net game was simple: Score as may “fives” as possible.

Of course, it’s impossible to do this perfectly, but we made some simple rules to encourage the batsman to rotate the strike after hitting a boundary: My most adored five.

In the net, batsmen bat in pairs, bowlers bowl in turn. Cones are set out to mark gaps in the field and batsmen rotate when they hit the gap. Pretty normal so far.

Here’s the variation:

• If the batsman hits a four (by their own judgement), the same bowler must bowl another ball.
• If the batsman rotates - as above - they get to record a successful five.
• The pair with most fives at the end wins.

Simple, but effective at working on a specific goal without taking players too far out of their expectations of a net. This was good for the University guys I coach because they are not super focused on performance, but still care enough to want to come to nets. This drill finds a nice balance between focus and “having a go”.

Try it, adapt it. Let me know what you think!

Spinners Drill: Get More Spin with a Pile of Doormats

Here's a drill I came up with on the fly. Originally I came across this idea for helping bowlers who bowl off the wrong foot to get a feel for timing their landing.

One day, a spinner asked me if I had an ideas for helping him brace and pull better against the front side of the body. It was a timing issue the same as bowling off the wrong foot. We tried this drill and it instantly got more spin and a feeling of power through the action. Great teamwork!

I share it for others to try.

Good Cricket Coaching Depends on Coachability. But There's Not a Lot the Coach Can Do about It

All coaches have limited time with people. Naturally we want the best ways to help them improve. The instinct is to start telling players what to do. So, every new coach is taught not to bombard players with information. Even the most coachable take in one or two points at most. 

I think in reality that is a hopelessly optimistic view. 

My guess is that it is more like one point in a hundred that gets through.

I think a two-way method is a lot more effective. There is less telling and more trying. This makes coaching a process of self-discovery by the cricketer, guided by the coach during a session.  When the player is building their own solutions they are more likely to be able to access them in the heat of a cricket match.

Of course, all this requires a certain frame of mind from the players and coach.

Coachable cricketers

"Coachable" does not mean listening to your every instruction. It means they are aware of your knowledge, open to discussion, ready to try some things out and are mindful of the results. Every coach wants a player like this to coach.

Recently, another coach I trust mentioned coachability varies; both between and within players. You always get the stubborn players who have their way. You also get the players who just want to be told what to do. My favourite variation of this type is the person who want to be told, doesn’t listen to the answer they asked for and blames the coach for not helping (yes, this has happened to me).

None of these responses are coachable.

You also get players who get the idea quickly, buy into the method and put the work in with focus and mindfulness. These are the golden coachable players.

However, people are fickle. Depending on things like mood and time we can be more or less coachable. It can even be as simple as being a morning person or an evening person. Your brain is ready when it’s ready.

This has been a revelation to my coaching.

When I struggled to help more difficult types, I switched my thinking from “this player can’t be coached” to “this player is not coachable right now”. Instead of giving up, I spend time trying to work out what will help get people into that coachable mindset.

I have spent almost entire one-to-one hours talking to some players who prefer to do their thinking through chat. I’ve also done nothing with players other than throw a lot of Sidearm at them while they work things out by doing. Mostly it's trying to find a balance.

I’ve made the most of times when people are “on” and I’ve even abandoned the odd session when individuals are “off”. Of course in a group setting you have to get through it, but I often find myself dropping back to something that’s silly and fun instead of worrying too much about coaching people in an disengaged frame of mind.

Find that place where people are most coachable.

Lights on coaching

Occasionally, you’ll click into sync with a player or a group. The lights go on. The session flows seamlessly with fun, engagement and learning at full blast. 

They happen rarely because everyone needs to be in the right frame of mind. That said, I’m convinced you can have an influence as a coach with your language and behaviour.

I go in with energy, enthusiasm and determination. I get the feel for the room and adapt my language and behaviour to try and guide everyone to the light switch. I hope my chimp brain doesn’t sabotage me too much by putting me in a bad mood. We have all been there.

Sometimes everyone comes with you. The curtain goes up and the lights come on.

Mostly it’s fine without being great.

You just have to get through those days. You can't win every session. Sometimes, despite your valiant efforts nobody learns anything. Don't beat yourself up. People are amazing, frustrating, wonderful and different to you.

Keep searching to get everyone in the coachable mindset. Keep working to keep yourself in that adaptable frame of mind so anyone who is coachable can get coaching.

It’s really the only option.

For me, I coach better when I let my ego fall away and focus on doing my best every time despite what I get back. I know sometimes I will fail. I’m a human. I know sometimes those I coach won't pick up what I put down. They are human. But when my lights are on, and everyone I’m coaching is the same, we make some magic cricket.

What’s your perspective?

Data is Not Cricket Coaching

We live in an Information Age. Data can be gathered on iPads. Everyone has an HD video camera in their pocket. You can spend a lot of money on gadgets that claim to use data to give you the edge. 

None of it is cricket coaching. 

However, it does have the power to inform the coach, who can deliver better coaching as a result. Computers are amazing at gathering huge amounts of information and sorting it into piles and patterns. Human beings are amazing at interpreting and translating this huge mass of ones and zeros into something tangible. Why would we not do it? 

Analysing data certainly informs coaching.

I have been using data with the teams I coach for years in some way or another. Here’s some of the things I found that have informed how I coach players: 

• The perfect wicket-taking length (and how often bad balls get wickets) .
• The impact of fielding on games and what fielding skills are most used in games.
• The underestimated importance of overs 30-40.
• Using video to review performance under different conditions.

Like coaching, there is an art as well as a science to analysing data, but if you can find useful data you can use coaching to find an edge. That's a really powerful tool available to a coach.

Perhaps even more powerful than basic advice that any player can find on YouTube these days?

Cricket Coaching Podcast

I'd like to turn your attention to a new podcast series I have produced with some of my cricket coaching friends:

You Are Not Alone Coach!

I have published four 16 minute shows, each on a different cricket coaching topic. Each one gives some practical advice on the subject of the show. It's designed to be quick while also giving some practical advice you can take to your next coaching session.

If you like it, let me know I can make more. There's plenty of topics and lots of my pals wanting a run at doing the show. Get the show here:

You Are Not Alone Coach!

iTunes/Podcasts

(Or search for it in your podcast app of choice)

The Purpose of Cricket Coaching

“I shall be striving to create an environment in which they can find out what they are good at, hopefully discover their own solutions to the cricketing puzzles they will be presented with, where they can find themselves part of an emerging (social) community, and, most importantly, play the game.

And I shall certainly be striving them to find out what they are good at and helping them to get better at it.”

— The Teesra

To me, these thoughts of Andrew Beaven made me think about the way kids learned to play cricket back in the old days: Free play in the park, street or playground.

Jumpers for goalposts, as the saying goes.

The world has changed a great deal since those days. We can no longer rely on players who arrive at sessions with a cricket instinct, passion and purpose honed from watching and playing the game informally with their mates.

We need to coach it.

It sounds counter-intuitive to those of us who grew up this way, but now it’s the job of the coach to build this lifelong passion and excitement. That means less formal stiffness and doing things “properly” and more informal, chaotic, laugh-out-loud fun.

When at the top of their game, a coach empowers people to do their own learning. And the only way - in my mind - to do that is to let go of structure and play the game as the raw problem-solving fun mess it was when we did it in the back yard with a tennis ball, a dustbin for stumps and special rules for when you hit the ball into the old ladies’ garden.

We can’t get back to those times, but we can tap into the core of what made them so great.

It’s my purpose to guide players towards their purpose at every session, whatever level of player I coach. While I can never be sure it will accelerate performance compared to other techniques, I can be sure it keeps them coming back for more.

What Makes a World-Class Cricket Drill?

Here's my thoughts about how to assess a drill. What do you think?

The Sidearm is my Favourite Cricket Coaching Tool

I love a coaching tool and use many day to day. Yet the best one remains the Sidearm because it has allowed me to transform how I coach.

This isn’t a sponsored post. Although perhaps it should be. It’s more my personal story of the Sidearm and how it became an essential cricket coaching tool for me.

I first was given Sidearm by it’s inventor years ago before it was ubiquitous in county and international cricket. I thought it had potential and tried it out to the usual problem of being hopelessly inaccurate with it. I also was a big fan of the bowling machine at the time. It could feed accurately at a pace that challenged players so there was no huge incentive to learn a new skill. I kept it around without using it much.

In April 2015 I got the Head Coach job at West of Scotland. I decided it would be more useful in coaching sessions because it’s more flexible and quicker to set up than the bowling machine. I still wasn’t very good with it, so used it sparingly. I bowled a lot of short balls!

Come winter, I decided I preferred the Sidearm, in principle, to a bowling machine. It’s much closer to actual bowling; the batsman can see the release and action. I could send it down at a good lick (certainly faster than my average meds). The barrier of the machine was gone so I could coach more quickly with shouting over the top of the whirring.

The problem was, I was still terrible.

Fortunately, I had PitchVision, indoor nets and a willing player to bowl at through the winter. I bowled in excess of 60 overs between September and January, doubling my accuracy while increasing speed. It took the first few hundred to click, but the improvements were dramatic towards the end of this period. I was confident I could get the ball down the other end reasonably well.

Now I had a tool I could use. And a world opened up.

One to one coaching sessions changed from machine and throw down drills to open net style sessions based far more on a holistic approach to batting where we would work on building game sense and technical effectiveness over perfection. My style was leaning this way already, the Sidearm both made it possible to achieve and sped this process up.

I couldn’t have done it without the Sidearm.

Fast forward to this winter. I’ve bowled thousands of balls with a Sidearm and got much better again. I have also embraced a number of modern coaching touchstones; growth mindset, CLA and TGfU, athlete-centred and NLP. While I could focus on these things without the Sidearm, it would make life a lot harder. I’ve got good enough with it to recreate most types of ball a bowling machine can deliver, up to about 80mph on a good day (about 65 on average).

Here’s the benefits as I see them,

• Built to match my style of working with a player unobstructed in an open net environment. (No fixed unopposed drills)
• A more realistic, lower cost, more portable bowling machine (when you get good enough).
• Allows bowlers a rest in team nets or middle practice as the coach or batsmen can bowl (even in pads).

In short, I strongly advise it’s worth putting in the effort to learn to throw. The biggest hurdle for most is the shame of bowling terribly with it while you learn. I get that, but power through by chucking some into an empty net when you get the chance. It took me about 450 balls (five hours or so) to feel OK about it. I suspect most people will need less time.

My coaching life would be significantly harder and I would be much less effective without the Sidearm. We have five at West and I encourage everyone to practice it, especially the non-bowlers. There are several Western Warriors who are working on it too. I am getting a few disciples.

I cannot recommend the tool enough. It’s invaluable.

Get one.

Bowl More or Less? A Dilemma for the Cricket Coach

There’s no easy answer for the coach who wants to know how to handle fast bowler workloads. Some say we should return to the days of bowling all the time. The ECB, meanwhile, sets tight directives on overs bowled.

Back in the day, fast bowlers bowled all day and didn’t do any specialist fitness work. These days we encourage bowlers into the gym.

Was this change right?

Or should we go back to the golden age of pace?

It’s unclear if bowlers were really fitter and faster in the old days, but let’s assume there were more pacemen with fewer injuries. Can we go back to those days?

I’m not sure we can, not without society changing.

Think back to when the West Indies dominated speed in the 80s. The conveyor belt of quick bowlers came about for various social-economic reasons: No computers or consoles. Getting about by running and walking rather than being driven. No formal coaching. Not much other sport to choose to play professionally, and a powerful internal cultural drive to prove to the world West Indian cricketers were the best. Playing on beaches with tennis balls. An approach to injury-prevention of saying “just walk it off”.

It was an environment build to create strong fast bowlers. One that is insanely hard to recreate in, say, modern Glasgow (where I coach). Cricket is one choice of sport in a world where playing sport often comes way down the list after playing Nintendo and watching Celtic or Rangers on the TV. Kids are provably weaker than local kids from 30 years ago and provably less likely to even try cricket, let alone want to bowl fast.

Even the ones who do play are on the field less thanks to weather and other things to do. When they do practice, they practice on hard indoor surfaces a lot, even in summer. A big chunk play no other sport.

If I was to apply the “just bowl more” principle to some of the 11-16 year old talented bowlers I coach in the Western Warriors I don’t know what would happen. I worry they would break down more, be more likely to quit the game and try to slow down to conserve energy. These guys are not Malcolm Marshall. Even they were lucky enough to have his talent, they don’t have his upbringing.

Of course, in spite of all this, I could tell them to bowl more and they might become stronger, faster and better.

The point is, I just don’t know. Neither does anyone else for sure. It’s all opinion.

And with a modern culture that rightly expects us to protect each other from needless injury, it’s difficult to take the risk.

Coaching fast bowlers

Where does this leave the coach?

Here’s my three broad ideas.

First understand the context of the fast bowlers you coach. What is their upbringing, what are their motivations, what other things are they into, how much of their bowling load can you control?

As we have learned, everything in a player’s life contributes to how much they can bowl.

Second, look at the individual needs of the player. Some will be more robust: They play multiple sports for example. These are the guys that can bowl more before they break down. Others will need to get stronger. That might mean greater amounts of gym work, OU weighted ball bowling and medicine ball chucking. It might also mean bowling less.

The ECB tried to make it clear by saying how much a player can bowl before their chance of injury goes too high. But this is always an average not a rule. Some will be stronger, some will not be as strong. We can test a million times and not have the ultimate answer that applies to everyone.

That means it’s more art than science. Play as safe as you can. Err on the side of bowler safety when someone is in your charge, but get a sense for how far you can push it too. You can push stronger bowlers harder. You can push bowlers with safer techniques harder too.

And that’s the third piece of this puzzle: Technique.

Many would argue it’s also the most important part. It’s certainly the part us humble coaches have most influence over. Helping a player build a sound technique on a strong, stable and mobile frame is one of the best ways to keep them bowling and therefore improving.

So, get super-good at knowing what a strong technique looks like and how to guide players towards it. If you know how to drill out lateral flexion and a mixed action, you are well on the road. If you know how to build Ian Pont’s four tent pegs, you are golden. Technically speaking.

This stuff is tough

Going back to the original question of “should bowlers bowl more and gym less?” I will opine that it depends.

It’s not as easy as saying bowlers should bowl more these days. Neither is it as certain to say talented pacemen should bowl less and spend more time lifting weights. It depends.

This stuff is hard. It requires skilful, experienced coaching, self-aware bowlers, and strong leadership and education from the ECB. Even then it would take a lot of luck to get the balance right every time.

Be confident when you coach fast bowlers because fortune favours the brave. But don’t expect to find a simple answer that works for everyone.

That’s why coaching is an art.

Loughborough’s Science Problem

“The point is that Loughborough, once it existed, had to do something. It was never going to maintain the status quo, or adopt a passive, non-prescriptive approach. Perhaps its greatest discovery has been that the game has a mystery that cannot be unravalled by throwing something like Loughborough at it. Some kid with a tapeball and an alleyway for a wicket will come up with a method that you can’t map, precisely because it has never existed before.”

— The Old Batsman

This cuts to a much deeper problem in coaching. Science or instinct?

Does top down, planned and centralised coaching produce better players than tapeball in an alleyway? I am not sure it's an either/or and I know throwing out blame or attacking hard-working coaches is not the answer.

Science dominated the conversation for a long time. Loughborough was established as a response to Australia’s National Academy. The system from down under coincided with one of the most successful cricket teams of all time. No wonder England copied it. 

So did South Africa. So did India, the epitome of “jumpers for goalposts” player development. Despite recent arguments, there’s some evidence of top-down success. 

There's also plenty of scientists and coaches who will tell you that a model based on centralised planning is a terrible idea. Players develop best, they argue, when they are left to solve their own issues and deal with their own problems. There was a time the best way to find a fast bowler was to whistle for one down a Yorkshire coal mine. 

Right now a lot of people are saying how obvious it is that Australia won the Ashes because they had extra pace. The result has made this conclusion inevitable. But what if England had done something unexpected? The world of politics shows that nothing is inevitable. Trump was never going to be President. Brexit was never really going to happen. Until it happened.

Loughborough style planning can’t handle this. It can only look at what went before and try to emulate better. When it fails to produce 90mph bowlers for England we say it hasn’t done the job. If it had rolled out a few nasty pacemen we would call it a success. What we don’t question is whether 90mph bowlers are the answer.

Maybe pace is the answer. Maybe a central Academy can never find one because England can’t produce those players since the country stopped coal mining. The world has changed. Controlled science is fighting a losing battle.

Maybe instead of trying to copy better, England look to copy worse and come up with their own answer. Maybe there is a creative solution out there in England. The next step forward, the next switch hitter, the next mystery bowler. Loughborough will never unearth such a player because they are building from history not exploring the future.

It's no surprise that the countries with the least formal structures produces the wildest players: Pakistan and Sri Lanka with the West Indies in third. They are coming up with their own way.

The inconsistency of these countries shows that creative instinct is not the total answer of course. Neither is highly managed science. I think we need a little of both. Let the bird fly free and offer as much financial and high tech support as we can.

At my level - club and school - I am grappling with the balance too. If a kid I coach comes to me with a unique style, do I try to coach more "efficiency"? Perhaps. What is more likely is I will not see that kid enough to have an impact. Even the guys I coach most I see twice a week at best. Most I see far, far less. Besides, their aim is to play and have fun, not have the most efficient bowling action or put on 10mph. Context rules.

At every level of coaching, we are all doing our best to have a positive impact. Yet, no one coach can make a huge difference. Not even a system has total control because we can never fully control every aspect of a players culture, environment and upbringing.

Perhaps instead of trying to find blame, we work harder and smarter to find what works at the edges and admit to ourselves that there is plenty out of our control.

Create Awesome Cricket Coaching Sessions

One of the biggest challenges for cricket coaches is not the "how to" coach stuff, but the part where people enjoy the sessions. We want it to be less broccoli and more ice cream. Here's a vlog I did about my experiences.

Let me know what you think.

Put smiles on faces at your cricket coaching sessions!

Nets Without Nets: Positive Patience Drill

Nets without nets: A customised game to develop outdoor cricket batting skills. 

One of the challenges for me as a coach is to find creative ways to use indoor practice to help players reach outdoor cricket goals. Here’s a game we played with a group of Under 16 cricketers I hoped would do just that. I hope you can find a practical use for something similar. 

I wanted the players to “just play” with minimal coach input to encourage self-discovery (one of the key principles of the constraints-led approach I am building into my coaching). However, I didn’t want the players to have a traditional game of indoor cricket as the goal was to improve strike rotation in outdoor cricket. Instead we set up a game with five a side, 15 minutes per innings, with the following way to score points: 

Batting team points: 

• 1 = Rotate the strike.
• 3 = Lose no wickets for 5 “rotations” .
• 4 = Hit the ball through target cones. 

Bowling team points: 

• 1 = Batsman hits the ball into the wall without it bouncing.
• 2 = Batsman is caught off the wall.
• 3 = Batsman is caught, bowled, stumped or assisted run out.
• 4 = Batsman is run out with a direct hit. 

The team with the most points after both innings wins the game.  

To keep the game moving we rotated the batsman around when a run was scored. The non-striker became the umpire while the umpire switched with one of the two waiting batsmen.  

The game was tight up until the penultimate ball, which also - hopefully - gave the players the feeling of performaing when something is on the result. 

From my point of view the game played out as hoped, with players working out tactics, making mistakes and enjoying the situational nature of the game. Some players wanted another round instead of moving to nets.

One player felt there were not enough balls faced. Although I disagree, he is the type of player who wants a lot of volume in his sessions. I need to do a better job of making the outcomes clear alongside making sure the “volume” guys get a bit of pure time on task. For me, not the most efficient use of time but for him an important way to build confidence. I am not sure he is right, but the only way he will learn for sure is by experiencing different training types.

Some  may also argue that there was no isolated technical work with all the focus on outcomes. I am currently highly convinced by the argument that there is no need to isolated batting technique outside of decision making. Action always follows a decision. So, for me, this was a technical session too in that players had to develop a technical method to perform in the match. I have not always though this, having been brought up on the ideal of isolated drills, so this is a new experiment. However, I never really had much luck trying to force a set technique on a player in isolation. Perhaps that is just poor coaching from me, or perhaps it’s because technique is more about outcome effectiveness than movement perfection.

What are your thoughts on using this type of game? Useful and practical or otherwise? 

We Need to Talk About Technique

Despite the overwhelming weight of evidence, this argument is not going away, 

“It could be that modern coaching has moved too far away from the orthodoxies, as if the methods honed over decades of play, passed down in MCC manuals, don’t have a place in the modern game. There is, after all, a lot of talk about encouraging players to express themselves and play their natural way. But when five batsmen with such obvious flaws fail in such a short space of time, that looks less like a coincidence, and more like a pattern.”

— Andy Bull

Look, I get the temptation to go back to the good old days when everyone was working towards a technique that was perfect. It’s the warm safety blanket of nostalgia. Simpler times when deep and ancient wisdom was passed down through The MCC Coaching Manual.

The problem is, this time never existed. 

When, throughout the rich history of cricket, has one master technique dominated the game? Not today, where coaches encourage players to develop their own solution. Not in the 70s, 80s, 90s or 00s when West Indians and Australians controlled international cricket with a variety of methods and techniques. Not in the 30s and 40s when Bradman set still unbeaten records with a technique that is still considered unorthodox. Not in Victorian cricket where Ranji invented a new shot called The Leg Glance and was seriously considered a cheat in many quarters for scoring off his pads in such a blatant way.

The MCC produced a manual in the 50s to help coaches and teachers have an easy reference guide. It was written by Harry Altham, an English Army Major who was educated privately. He was a fine coach by all accounts, but certainly did not carry the wisdom of the ages when writing it. It was written from one context: English Post-Colonial, Gentleman, Mid-century. It might or might not have been the only method in that context, but the evidence shows clearly it is wrong in most cases.

In fact, this was recognised by the MCC when the MCC Masterclass book - based on varied advice from different quarters - superseded this work in the 90s. There has not been an MCC manual since. Over 60 years since it's first incarnation and over 20 years since the last, we still cling to the idea that the MCC had all the answers in 1952. 

It's just not true.

My hope is soon we can recognise technique not as a series of dogmatic rules to be applied to perfection as defined by one Englishman in the 1950s, but as it is: wholly dependent on the body, mind, upbringing and culture of each player. That's harder to coach and not as nostalgic, but it's closer to the truth.

Now Bowl with Fire: A Quick Primer on Fast Bowling for Cricket 🔥

This is a post about bowling speed. I wanted to be clear because there has been a lot of cross-talk about fast bowling recently. This is my effort to simplify speed for the confused coach.

Why are you confused? Because it’s confusing! There’s a lot of people talking in a lot of ways.

Steffan Jones is doing crazy innovation between S&C and technical correction with school age bowlers and sharing his ideas as he goes. I think he would admit it’s pretty complex stuff!

Meanwhile, the Grandmaster of Pace, Ian Pont, has other ideas. His methods are slightly different and very much grounded in technique through drilling core positions.

Then there is the ECB. Coaching courses have long abandoned the idea of technique first. They barely touch on S&C. They focus on game-based learning and maximum fun over drills, toys and methods.

Each approach is different. There is some crossover but there are also disagreements.

It is confusing.

What if you just want to know how to coach some pace?

Here’s my effort to simplify and tell you what I find works with the players I work with on pace. It’s not set in stone. It’s not the ultimate secrets of speed. but it might give you a head start.

Commitment beats everything

By far the number one way to be a fast bowler is to commit to being a fast bowler.

Sounds simple, but 90% of the bowlers I coach don’t commit to speed. They may be committed to bowling and bowl a lot. They might be naturally nippy. They might get bounce, swing and seam movement.

Whoever they are, they do not commit to fast bowling.

Anyone can increase speed - yes, without losing accuracy before you raise an eyebrow - but pace doesn’t come from committing to bowling in nets and games. That’s only one small piece of the puzzle.

No. For real speed without comprise you need to focus on it more than just bowling and hoping. Do that first and the rest is implementation details.

Four tent pegs are best

Ian Pont came up with the four tent pegs model of coaching speed years ago and it’s marvellous in its simplicity. Study it.

Of course, understanding the best positions for pace is one thing, drilling to get it into muscle memory is quite another. That’s why it only works when you commit.

Throw medicine balls

With technical work going on, you can use medicine balls to help players generate more power from the same frame.

Med balls are great because they are cheap, portable, usable by all ages and bridge the gap between pure strength exercises and bowling a ball.

There’s a lot of science behind it but for the coach all you really need to do is pick a 1-2kg ball that bounces and a couple of drills from the internet. Don’t complicate it, just chuck that ball about!

Bowl OU balls

The next step on the path from S&C to bowling is “overweight underweight” balls. Basically, heavy and light cricket balls. They are between 250g and 100g where a standard ball is 156g. So it’s not like there is a huge difference but it works.

The science with these balls is less established. It’s shown to work in baseball and in athletics. In cricket, I see results with bowlers putting on up to 5mph in one session. Anecdotal but convincing.

They are hard to get hold of in the UK but worth the investment in an order from Somerset Sports. They are the only place I know that stock them.

Again, play about with using them. They are best suited to low volume (perhaps 15-30 balls in a session) and in conjunction with a willing bowler who wants to use them regularly.

Yes, we are back to commitment again!

Manage load

There’s a lot of chat about how much bowlers should bowl. While it’s true that bowling is the best way to get strong to bowl, it’s also the best way to get injured. It’s tough to be a really fast bowler if you are knackered from a lot of bowling.

We all have to strike a balance.

Chances are you won’t be able to manage the number of overs of the bowlers you coach. If they are talented they will be playing in a number of teams. Even those who only play under one coach will rarely be bothered about “workload management”. They just want to play cricket.

Your best bet is to create self-awareness that bowling too much will slow them down eventually. It might be injury or fatigue but pace is fastest when they are fresh, strong and firing. Then do your bit: be mindful of not asking your bowlers to toil away in nets for two hours, three times a week.

Keep it simple

For me, bowling fast is a deep and exciting area of the game. You can delve as far as you want but if you want to keep it simple then you can do that too.

Have fun with it. Build technique with tent pegs, build strong bowlers with medicine balls and OU weighted balls and keep an eye on your workload. From under 10 to senior pros, this is the simplest way to go.

If you want more ideas for improving fast bowlers, contact me for a coach development session.

Net Game: Quadrants

Here's another game I made up to make a fun session for some under 15 players. I reckon it could work with most ages too.

In the game, the batsman gets to choose two "safe" zones. In this game we spilt the net into four; behind and in front, off side and on side. The batsman faces 24 balls.

Points are scored by hitting the ball with a full swing of the bat:

• 0 points: Miss the ball
• 0 points: ball defended, pushed or tapped.
• 0 points: ball hit on the ground into unsafe zone.
• 1 point: Wide bowled
• 1 point: Ball struck into the safe zone in the air.
• 2 points: Ball struck into the safe zone along the ground (and I really mean it must bounce before hitting the net!)

Obviously you can play with the points system to encourage different tactical and technical outcomes. This one was about trying to wack the ball into safe space.

The tactical wrinkle was the Power play.

The bowlers can call a six ball power play anytime during each batsman's innings. When the power play is on, the batsman has to remove one safe zone, meaning there is only one to hit into. The same points apply.

Be warned, this can be chaotic, especially with kids. I encourage them to find safe tactics to buck the rules and ways to play the "beat the system" as much as possible. Sometimes they go a bit far and I have to reign it in for safety or sense (like bowling deliberate wides). Mainly, it's just great fun and very competitive. 

You will no doubt want to tweak it for your needs, but give it a go!