WARNING - Unpopular opinion alert

Handball; Coaches, there is still value in using 'old-school' drills!

As a professional coach, coach educator, and academic, I wear a number of caps within the sports coaching industry. One of the most prominent developments in recent years that has effected me within all three contexts, is the emergence of new coaching delivery concepts, and the removal of outdated 'old-school' techniques.

Coaches who were once deemed as 'elite', are now seen as little more than 'creators of robots'.

Often uninspiring, ultra-authoritarian, command based coaches who were unable to create high performers whilst simultaneously promoting enjoyment and creativity etc. This, all because of a perception that coaching was once a command based role where coaches 'drilled' participants to efficiency. Since coaching has developed, it has become more pedagogical in its delivery, with more emphasis placed on discovery; teaching players to want to learn for themselves, and in doing so, creating more responsible, more empowered players. Instead of bosses, coaches are facilitators, constructing opportunities for participants to learn for themselves.

As sports coaching has professionalised, it has naturally begun the removal process of outdated methods that are deemed 'no longer necessary'. And for all of the positive in this, I fear slightly for what we could also lose..

I recently read an extract from a discussion between a coach and coach educator. During a mentoring session A coach had used a drills / command (instructional) based approach to coach a specific type of technique. A real ‘this is how you do it, now go and do it’ approach. The coach educator said nothing but flagged it as an issue to raise during his feedback. At the end of training the educator asked the coach whether there'might be a more effective, more pedagogical way to get the same result, whereby the players might seek and find the answers themselves instead of the coach ‘telling’ them how to do it? He used buzzwords like enlightenment, enrichment, empowerment, ownership, discovery, responsibility, and so on.. And naturally the coach was immediately drawn to the idea that there might have been a better way...

Here's the thing, coaches:

In the new world of Sports Coaching, we have become increasingly infatuated by the art of facilitation. Methods such as ‘Guided discovery’, ‘Teaching Games For Understanding (TGfU)’, & ‘constructivism’ are now commonplace whenever one explores the art of great coaching. Just last week I wrote about the dangers of joystick coaching; coaches instructing their players rather than empowering them to make their own decisions to achieve the best outcome. As a coach and an academic, there is no bigger advocate of these methods of facilitation than me, but only when used properly and in the correct moments. 

The problem with the example I used, is that too many coaches and coach educators are starting to use these concepts to hide behind the fact that they actually need to coach! The coach in the example above was coaching a technique to beginner Handball players, using his knowledge and experience of the workings of that technique. The coach educator however, alluded to the idea the players might have had been given a wider range of benefits if the coach has used a more 'discovery' led method to coach this technique. I.e. constructing a game to allow the players to figure out the best technique, instruction of an uninspiring command led drill.

Guided Discovery is an amazing way of developing excellent decision makers, but it does little to develop technique.. Small Sided Games? Well they provide more opportunity for players to have the ball in their hands, but what good is that if players cannot catch and pass a ball? Teaching Games for Understanding! Brilliant, but again these games will do very little for the development of technique. 

One of the coaching practices receiving a lot of scrutiny is the use of 'old-school' drills / command based coaching. It is scrutinised because, used regularly it can create 'robotic' players, and can lead to poor decision making capabilities. Drills based practices are often uninspiring and unenjoyable, and are ultimately why they are being phased out of the coaching industry in favour of new, creative methods such as those aforementioned.. 

But what we forget about technique, is that techniques are very often not open to interpretation. Drills based coaching might rightly be criticised for being too direct, but they are specific and criterion based. It means that in any case whereby the coach wants to develop a specific technique like feinting, which is not open to interpretation (there is one way and no leeway), then this style has huge benefits. Far more so than most other methods of teaching. 

I recently uploaded a video of some of my 9 year old’s carrying out two different, very challenging types of feint, specific to Handball. The video amassed 30,000 views in a matter of days on my social media, mainly because of the technical difficulty of the actions these kids were able to competently carry out at ‘such a young age’. 

I uploaded the video to demonstrate that there is still a place for a instruction, drill based coaching strategy, especially for coaches working with kids. These children learnt two advanced Handball techniques not through guided discovery or TGfU, but rather by a number of very specific commands; “do this, do that, and repeat it over and over again” (Of course, it was structured in a way that was manageable & progressive, but command based nonetheless. And of course the next step in their learning process it to progress into game-based situations)

I did it to demonstrate that coaching is never a one size fits all approach. Many different delivery methods & coaching styles are required within different contexts, with different participants, at different times. Yes, guided discovery’, TGfU’, & ‘constructivism’ are brilliant for developing game sense and understanding, but they do very little for technique. As a general rule, if you are attempting to develop technique, there must first be a period of instruction led coaching, especially when working with young players without a point of reference to what good technique looks like. This is because a soft skills are often not open to interpretation and kids especially need to know very clearly, very directly, what is required when learning a particular skill. 

....Lets not be too quick to forget what once worked, and why it worked.