Waratahs v Jaguares, Round 16 - Saturday 8 July, Allianz Stadium

[cyclopath]

Surely you are not serious?

Why do the world's best pro teams invest markedly and increasingly in highly specialised 'mental skills' and 'sports psych' coaches?

Of the 20 or so reasons, one is certainly to deal with the dimensions of human athletic skill in team sports of exactly the type and kind to which you refer.

'Mental aptitude and concentration' (your words) in demanding elite team sports can be affected by a huge range of alterable human psychology, S&C and team culture variables: fatigue, low inner psych confidence team-wise or individually, unclarity in preparedness and tactical agreement within a team as to how respond and play, poor team morale, an excessively individualistic micro-culture within the team that mitigates against close-in player-to-player trust, poor preparedness to handle pressure contexts, etc, etc. These and other related variables can all be managed and potentially improved by the right type of insight and specialist coaching support.

To say these parameters 'have nothing to do with coaching' (you are of course I assume an expert in such matters in speaking so boldly as you do) is, bluntly, a 1980s definition of team management thinking to put it most politely.

If you fail to grasp my points, please carefully study the NZ rugby career of one Glibert Enoka, the Mental Skills Coach of the ABs (and now taking on a far bigger role across all of NZ rugby) in just this area of expertise. To get started re Enoka and what he thinks and brings have a look at:

https://www.gameplan-a.com/2017/03/make-mental-strength-your-strongest-skill/

There's much more available re his seminal work in this area re the ABs. Why do we think they are so sustainedly successful? One reason: in their coaching capabilities they map every critical performance and skills parameter and detail, not just some.

I have been saying for years here and otherwise that Australian elite rugby - and especially the Wallabies - need our own version of Gilbert Enoka.

Mental skills, team culture (in the deep not superficial meaning of that term) and individual player psych development are simply a huge part of building successful teams and more particularly sustainable and repetitive success vs 'every 20 year one-off outliers'.

And moreover the inferred notion that somehow the 'players should take responsibility and just sharpen up and fix these issues themselves' is a combination of (a) the utterly naive (humans in teams rarely fix their own mentally- or team culture-based based frailties, they almost always need assistance of one type or another particularly in even becoming aware of what is happening to, or inside, them) and (b) passively abrogating the clear responsibilities of modern elite HCs to diagnose attitudinal, emotional, cultural, confidence, concentration etc etc issues within their teams and subsequently engage the right specialist resources to fix them.

Waiting and hoping that such problems and deficiencies will just auto-magically fix themselves with a win here and there is a reckless, high-risk HC strategy. Assuming you want your RU to avoid bankruptcy, that is.

That's all well and good, but how did teams of the past cope without mental skills coaches? How did the Wallabies concede only 1 try in RWC 1999? How did they close out games against the ABs with regularity between 1998-2002? I appreciate that things change as sport evolves, but you can't move too far the other way and put aside the responsibility of players for their own application, attitude and aptitude. Some of the deficiencies we are seeing repeatedly in the Waratahs, and to a degree in the Wallabies are in very basic functions that any player at this level should be able to execute without needing someone to focus their rugby-intelligence upon it. I agree, a long term pattern of success is more likely with all aspects being attended to, but players clearly can, and should, be able to motivate themselves and focus themselves upon the skills for which they are highly paid.
A coaching issue? Of course.
A player issue? Equally, of course, in my mind.

 

[gel]

And moreover the inferred notion that somehow the 'players should take responsibility and just sharpen up and fix these issues themselves' is a combination of (a) the utterly naive (humans in teams rarely fix their own mentally- or team culture-based based frailties, they almost always need assistance of one type or another particularly in even becoming aware of what is happening to, or inside, them) and (b) passively abrogating the clear responsibilities of modern elite HCs to diagnose attitudinal, emotional, cultural, confidence, concentration etc etc issues within their teams and subsequently engage the right specialist resources to fix them.

With all due respect, I think it is incorrect to lump professionals in with the whole of humanity - humans are poor at identifying their own deficiencies and then seeking out means to rectify them. Professionals (and particularly elite professionals) are very adept at identifying their weaknesses and figuring out means to eliminate them or at the very least minimise them. "Why did I not win?" is exactly the question that a professional asks whenever a result doesn't go as planned, and the elite professional has to be skilled at answering that (or seeking out the answer) or they would not be where they are today.

I am not oblivious to the role of the coaching and prep staff and the part they play. A horrible coaching setup will clearly have a detrimental effect on how the team gels/plays etc. But individual core skill deficiencies? No.

There is only so much they can do before it is up to the player to actually deliver.

There is no threat of replacement given the next players in line are part time professionals without anywhere near the physical training and attributes necessary to step up.

There is no reason that any of these players could not hire a head doctor (or any other specialist) to address their issues themselves.

 

[fatprop]

It is cheaper to dump a coach than sack half a team

 

[cyclopath]

It is cheaper to dump a coach than sack half a team

True. And the revolving door of coaches coming and going at senior level in Aus rugby is surely going to make the recruitment of quality, internationally-respected coaches that much easier.

 

[fatprop]

True. And the revolving door of coaches coming and going at senior level in Aus rugby is surely going to make the recruitment of quality, internationally-respected coaches that much easier.

I think it doesn't matter so much, coaches getting dumped appears to be part of their job description

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

 

[wamberal]

I think it doesn't matter so much, coaches getting dumped appears to be part of their job description

Sent from my Nexus 9 using Tapatalk

The old cliche. A coach is somebody who has just been sacked or expects to be any minute.

 

[RedsHappy]

That's all well and good, but how did teams of the past cope without mental skills coaches? How did the Wallabies concede only 1 try in RWC 1999? How did they close out games against the ABs with regularity between 1998-2002? I appreciate that things change as sport evolves, but you can't move too far the other way and put aside the responsibility of players for their own application, attitude and aptitude. Some of the deficiencies we are seeing repeatedly in the Waratahs, and to a degree in the Wallabies are in very basic functions that any player at this level should be able to execute without needing someone to focus their rugby-intelligence upon it. I agree, a long term pattern of success is more likely with all aspects being attended to, but players clearly can, and should, be able to motivate themselves and focus themselves upon the skills for which they are highly paid.
A coaching issue? Of course.
A player issue? Equally, of course, in my mind.

I respect your theory - 'they the players must and can be responsible for their own mental application' - and a certain factually-based nostalgia for past deeds.

But in a number of ways, the past is a different place.

Back then the Wallabies were kind of equal to the ABs for a while, now we are in their vapour trail and they have 3 RWCs to show for it, two won in the last 2 4 year cycles whilst we have degraded into excuses and blame-games and abject mediocrity with zero sign of any credible break-out. They are very clearly better coached and have a major program in Mental Skills coaching, increasingly across all of the upper reaches of NZ rugby. Are they just soppy and silly in this and we must just 'toughen up and fix ourselves as individuals'? I don't think it's like that.

Right in the now, 2017, in very competitive global sporting markets and where often competition itself is far more advanced and skilful than was the case say 20 years ago, I fully stand by what I offered above.

Have a look at what the very best do, in very demanding global team sports, where there is a lot of money and huge prestige at stake.

Mantal Skills and Sports Psych coaching is booming at these levels.

Many of the most successful coaches at the very top level typically say 'once we get up here, it's all about what's between the ears.'

That assessment has deep meaning. Only one singular aspect of that meaning is: 'you go and get yourself in shape to concentrate and apply yourself'.

Many other meanings increasingly are 'hey, we have specialists who can help you get a lot better at that than you think you are or can be today'.

 

[cyclopath]

I respect your theory - 'they the players must and can be responsible for their own mental application' - and a certain factually-based nostalgia for past deeds.

But in a number of ways, the past is a different place.

Back then the Wallabies were kind of equal to the ABs for a while, now we are in their vapour trail and they have 3 RWCs to show for it, two won in the last 2 4 year cycles whilst we have degraded into excuses and blame-games and abject mediocrity with zero sign of any credible break-out. They are very clearly better coached and have a major program in Mental Skills coaching, increasingly across all of the upper reaches of NZ rugby. Are they just soppy and silly in this and we must just 'toughen up and fix ourselves as individuals'? I don't think it's like that.

Right in the now, 2017, in very competitive global sporting markets and where often competition itself is far more advanced and skilful than was the case say 20 years ago, I fully stand by what I offered above.

Have a look at what the very best do, in very demanding global team sports, where there is a lot of money and huge prestige at stake.

Mantal Skills and Sports Psych coaching is booming at these levels.

Many of the most successful coaches at the very top level typically say 'once we get up here, it's all about what's between the ears.'

That assessment has deep meaning. Only one singular aspect of that meaning is: 'you go and get yourself in shape to concentrate and apply yourself'.

Many other meanings increasingly are 'hey, we have specialists who can help you get a lot better at that than you think you are or can be today'.

It's not nostalgia, it's an observation of how things were done in another time. I realise the landscape has changed. You're making it something of a binary argument, I'm not.

 

[RedsHappy]

With all due respect, I think it is incorrect to lump professionals in with the whole of humanity - humans are poor at identifying their own deficiencies and then seeking out means to rectify them. Professionals (and particularly elite professionals) are very adept at identifying their weaknesses and figuring out means to eliminate them or at the very least minimise them. "Why did I not win?" is exactly the question that a professional asks whenever a result doesn't go as planned, and the elite professional has to be skilled at answering that (or seeking out the answer) or they would not be where they are today.

I am not oblivious to the role of the coaching and prep staff and the part they play. A horrible coaching setup will clearly have a detrimental effect on how the team gels/plays etc. But individual core skill deficiencies? No.

There is only so much they can do before it is up to the player to actually deliver.

There is no threat of replacement given the next players in line are part time professionals without anywhere near the physical training and attributes necessary to step up.

There is no reason that any of these players could not hire a head doctor (or any other specialist) to address their issues themselves.

Hey gel - do you recall that Link bought 'Chook' Fowler into the Reds' broadly-based and rather complete coaching group in 2010?

We can both relate to that.

Fowler is a sports and team psychologist as well as being adept in game strategy, kicking, inter alia. Every top coach that's ever worked with Fowler, rates him highly.

He's also a rather difficult and complex person.

But those on the inside credited then, in that time, him with making a major contribution to the Reds' success in 2010-11.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...d/news-story/af004a380a51b127306644faf3cb3ee8

As soon as he left the Reds in early 2012 - as their outrageous hubris built and their 'star' players wanted no more 'teaching' as they were 'the champions' - just by sheer coincidence the team began to drift downhill.

Maybe the 2017 Reds' team culture and mindset will fix itself with admonitions from the coaches to 'get yourself together son', kicks up the arse, 'fix your concentration or else', and 'gee ups' from N Stiles and his merry band of limited Assistants, but the evidence so far points to that not being enough, or not enough to transcend the enthusiastic-sounding excuses and begin to really win something of substance.

 

[Joe Blow]

That wasn't really the point I was trying to make.

Clearly one of the biggest issues with the Tahs this year has been losing games due to periods where they just went completely absent and that needs to be addressed.

I was trying to differentiate between things that relate to structures which I think are solely the responsibility of the coaching staff and things that I think the players have a considerable amount of responsibility for.

You'd be upset if the kid in your under 12s side standing one spot off the breakdown just ran away and let the opposition player run straight through with a little dummy because they should know better and they should be concentrating on their job at hand.

That's the U12s. We are talking about full time, well paid professional rugby players. If they do the same they should be out of a job and if they show signs of doing the same in training then they should never be selected.

 

[formerflanker]

That's the U12s. We are talking about full time, well paid professional rugby players. If they do the same they should be out of a job and if they show signs of doing the same in training then they should never be selected.

An earlier poster (can't remember who) correctly identified coaching as equally important in getting these things right.
For example, it's up to the coach to relentlessly drill the players into correct pillar and post techniques so that muscle memory kicks in during the game when fatigue causes sloppy mental reasoning.

 

[Ruggo]

A good can of harden the fuck up is what's needed. Be a man before being a rugby player. I don't mean that in a macho sense but rather to have honour. That is what is good about club rugby as a development pathway as they get lived experience to remind them of the privilege and opportunity they have.

 

[wamberal]

Totally agree. In the Australian context every young "star" should play some grade footy, preferably in a struggling team. Not in Colts, either, against men.

 

[gel]

Hey gel - do you recall that Link bought 'Chook' Fowler into the Reds' broadly-based and rather complete coaching group in 2010?

We can both relate to that.

Fowler is a sports and team psychologist as well as being adept in game strategy, kicking, inter alia. Every top coach that's ever worked with Fowler, rates him highly.

He's also a rather difficult and complex person.

But those on the inside credited then, in that time, him with making a major contribution to the Reds' success in 2010-11.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/spo...d/news-story/af004a380a51b127306644faf3cb3ee8

As soon as he left the Reds in early 2012 - as their outrageous hubris built and their 'star' players wanted no more 'teaching' as they were 'the champions' - just by sheer coincidence the team began to drift downhill.

Maybe the 2017 Reds' team culture and mindset will fix itself with admonitions from the coaches to 'get yourself together son', kicks up the arse, 'fix your concentration or else', and 'gee ups' from N Stiles and his merry band of limited Assistants, but the evidence so far points to that not being enough, or not enough to transcend the enthusiastic-sounding excuses and begin to really win something of substance.

They have a part to play, for sure.

Fowler was also a kicking coach as well wasn't he?

Which of the Australian super rugby players have hired him to be their personal kicking coach? Or hired him to run through critiques after every match and work on mental issues?

I'm going to bet: none.

What is Foley doing to fix his kicking limitations? Braveheart has mentioned there's no left foot kicker and that causing issues sometimes - what's Foley doing to improve his ability to kick with either foot?

Just because the coaching staff might be numpties, doesn't mean that the players can't address their own issues with the own considerable cash.

 

[wamberal]

Foley was coached by Andrew Mehrtens a while ago.


The only charitable view that I can take is that Foley has some sort of congenital inability to kick properly. Either that or he does not do enough kicking practice.

 

[Ruggo]

Sorry to get off the thread topic but:

A good pathway for young talent identified for the elite level should be club rugby and the club environment at the amateur level.

What I would like to see is the regional unions convert to the off season of elite rugby and young talent spend time playing in these competitions.

• These players have their elite training programs and the onus is on them to adhere to them. Personal responsibility is the objective
• The clubs through their networks finds them accommodation and work (Laborer, trades assistant etc.). Humility is the objective

The amateur environment serves as a genuine learning experience and a grounding force for elite players to develop as young men and not just young rugby players. Putting in a day's work then going to training after for the sheer love of the game and having a drink (not particularly alcohol) with the boys in the club house after training. Putting in doing day to day tasks that keep the club alive (putting in at working bees, helping out with the juniors, setting up for home games etc.).

This is also a win for regional rugby as:

• It opens channels to attract players when the sad reality is that often regional clubs struggle for numbers.
• It raises the standard of training and competition as the young elite players integrate their knowledge into the club and competition.

This is how we get better attitudes in Australian ruby and also strengthen the national footprint of the code.

 

[gel]

Foley was coached by Andrew Mehrtens a while ago.

Yep. For part of a season. And not ongoing. Foley's done nothing to maintain or improve.

That's like me having a hot lap with Craig Lowndes and saying I'm good to go for super cars for the rest of eternity.

 

[Ruggo]

Foley being coached by Mehrtens explains why they need to hide him in defense.