Performance Profiling

First post in a while and I apologise for that. So I have completed 3 months of my Masters course at the University of Chichester. One topic I have learnt about is performance profiling. This method takes me back to my childhood playing football manager games. The process was used on games as a way to analyse the attributes of the different players. This idea, I personally think is brilliant, it gives analysts and gamers a way to compare the performances of a team against the opposition performances within their league. They can be used to analyse certain areas of performance or the general performance of a team. So, for instance, the analyst might be looking to analyse their teams attacking performance. So they’d use shots, shots on target, crosses, possession, attacking third entries and penalty area entries figures.

Performance Profile Example

From the above example, the different colours represent your teams performance at 25%, 50% and 75%. Green represents your teams 25% level, Blue represents your teams 50% level and Red represents your teams 75% level. So in this example we can see that this teams percentage of successful penalty area entries has a 25% level below 40. The 50% level is just above 60 and the 75% level is at about 80. Apart from these the other attacking areas for each level are at 100 or above 80. So in comparison to the other teams in their league, they are producing statistics better than any other team in their division. Where as their percentage of successful penalty area entries is in need of improvement. Their 25% level is one of the worst in their league. But their 50% and 75% levels are about average for every other team in their league.

I believe this method of analysing performance is very useful and the reason I have written this post about it is that I believe others should use it. Anybody could use it to do analyse on any team. Any coach could use it to analyse their own teams whether it is a sunday league team, a junior team or a semi-professional team. I believe that these profiles can point towards coaching topics for training for later in the season. This is during the season after your teams have played at least 8 games. This figure is used to get enough opposition performances to compare your own performances too.

High Speed Ball Possession and Playing Position

Cristiano Ronaldo running with the ball.

As I am coming to the end of my university degree, it is the time for jobs. During my final year of university life, I undertook a dissertation. This dissertation looked into the work profiles of youth elite athletes and their playing positions. Through the search for jobs, I came across some academic work by Chris Carling, a performance analyst at Lille Football Club. The paper looks at the analysis of physical activity profiles when running with the ball in a professional soccer team (Carling, 2009).

If I was to compare my dissertation to his work, not only is it a lot better but it is an upgrade. Many authors have attempted to find differences and advantages through analysing elite player work profiles. Although my dissertation looked into youth elite football players, it looks into the distance covered by the players over 90 minutes of a football match. I found that forwards ran more than defenders over 90 minutes. In Carling’s paper it finds that elite players spend most of the time with the ball running at high speeds. The elite players spent 1.7% of the 90 minute match with possession of the ball. It would be interesting to analyse what the youth elite players in my study would have done with the ball in their possession. Carling states that “the ability to move at high speed with the ball seems to be an important facet of contemporary elite soccer and players across all positions should be able to carry out such actions” (2009). He then goes on to mention that people have tried to transfer this into training drills. He also states that this maybe is a way to improve performance if the elite players are able to perform at high speeds.

In the paper’s discussion he cites two other papers Carling et al (2008) and Stolen et al (2005) which both confirm a need for individualised training programs as the distances covered at different speeds vary according to play position. He then states that findings imply that fitness-training with and without the ball should be based on the specific requirements of each playing position. This is in agreement with my study, but would this be the same at youth level. Would players need to train at different speeds with and without the ball. Surely, this is just fartlek training with a ball.

Inconclusion, youth players looking to improve their football should learn to perform at high speeds with the ball at their feet. Training sessions should also look to train players with possession of the ball at high speeds but also without. But dependent on what position the child wants to player, they should train to the specifications of that certain position.

Coaching with Reflective Practice – 3 of 3

The most common type of management during coaching sessions is behavioural management, especially when coaching younger children. As stated in an earlier post, Winnick cites Walker, Shea and Bauer (2007), who defines behavioral management as “actions [by] teachers … [to] engage in [and] to enhance the probability that children, individually and in groups, will develop effective behaviours that are personally fulfilling, productive and socially acceptable” (2011, p. 102). If the participants within the group are not concentrating then they do not learn to their full capacity and they may prevent others within the group from learning. This could cause disruptions which may hinder the potential of achievement of the students. This may create frustration within some of the students which would mean that the environment of coaching is not enjoyable.

Using In-Action and On-Action Reflection, behaviour from the group was not too poor (Gilbert & Trudel, 2006). The group cooperated with the coach and enabled a comfortable and enjoyable environment to learn in. However, on the occasion when behaviour did deteriorate, then positive reinforcement was utilised. Positive reinforcement is the use of praise towards good behaviour in hope that the children responds to the praise and produce increased effort in drills or activities (Winnick, 2011, p. 103). This would, consequently, improve the groups ability. During each session, when an athlete behaved appropriately, praise was used. For example, an athlete had a history of bad behaviour. The athlete is praised by the coach for performing well in activities, like a shadow play drill, which improves badminton footwork.

On reflection, the only behaviour problems within the group was talking when the coach was talking. This was eradicated immediately after it occurred. Apart from this incident, the coach did not experience further behavioural problems after this event. This is potentially because the club was an after-school club, so the participants wanted to be there. If the situation was different, for instance within school time, another type of behavioural management may need to be used. Positive reinforcement behavioural management does not always work as successfully as planned, as the participant may ignore this attempt to improve behaviour and continue to behave poorly. In future, if bad behaviour became a problem then the coach would have to experiment with other methods to improve behaviour. These behavioural management methods would include negative reinforcement, punishment or extinction (Winnick, 2011, p.103).

In conclusion, during this informative 20 hour placement, the coach learnt and discovered many methods to improve their coaching and ability to develop badminton players in a high school setting. Using Retrospective Reflection-On-Action, the placement was successful. The attempt to increase numbers was difficult. The organisation was consistently completed to make each session fun and enjoyable. The differentiation was used to challenge each individual, and further challenged the coach to use this method to develop participants. Communication is essential to transfer information to anybody, but during a coach session it is even more important for the coach. Different forms of communication were used to aid participant learning of badminton. Finally, management methods were used to aid each individuals learning within sessions. The whole placement was successful, fun and developed learning in students developing badminton skills. The placement was extremely beneficial for the coach, especially the ability to change sessions and differentiate between participates, to increase learning within a group.

Reference List

• Balyi, I., & Hamilton, A. (2004). Long-term athlete development: trainability in childhood and adolescence. Olympic Coach, 16(1), 4-9.
• Ericsson, K. (1996). The acquisition of expert performance: An introduction to some of the issues. In K. Ericson, (Ed) The road to excellence: the acquisition of expert performance in th earts and sciences, sports and games. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Gilbert, W., & Trudel, P. (2006). The coach as a reflective practitioner. The sports coach as educator: Re-conceptualising sports coaching, p.113-127.
• Lyle, J. (2005). Sports coaching concepts: A framework for coaches’ behaviour. Routledge.
• Morley, D and Bailey, R. (2006) Meeting the needs of your most able pupils : physical education and sport. London:Routledge.
• Penney, D. (2002). Equality, equity and inclusion in physical education and school sport. The sociology of sport and physical education: An introductory reader, 110-128.
• Stevenson, A. (2010) Oxford Dictionary of English. 3rd Edition. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
• Winnick, J. P. (Ed.). (2011). Adapted physical education and sport. USA:Human Kinetics.

Coaching with Reflective Practice – 2 of 3

<em>”The aim in differentiation should be to address the ways in which the curriculum and teaching can ensure that all pupils are enabled access to the skills, knowledge and understanding that is appropriate to their different levels of learning and different learning potentials”.</em> (Penney, 2002, p.115)

Morley and Bailey’s differentiation model looks at changing activities and coaching sessions to cater for different abilities within a group of individuals (2006). To reflect on this process within the 20 hour placement, a mixture of in-action and on-action reflection was used (Gilbert & Trudel, 2006). During each session this model was reflected on as the coach always wanted their participants to improve. Therefore, this makes the coach constantly thinking throughout the coaching session, if the activities could be differed for different individuals through the presentation, the organisation or the content.

Before each session when on-action reflection was used from the previous session, differentiation was used to challenge each individual with the content provided. This related to the pace at which activities were accelerated through the session and also the level of each activity. Then during the session using in-action reflect, the session was adjusted with the organisation and presentation. The questioning, resources and teaching styles presented to the group were adjusted for each individual, so they were challenged according to their ability. When performing the activities within the session the grouping, spacing and roles were adjusted for each individual.

Within the placement, one player was significantly better than the others, so to challenge the player he was given a coaching role to help a player who in comparison was a beginner. This allowed the better player to learn the techniques of badminton and teach them to the inexperienced player, and therefore could mentally remember these movements subconsciously. This process had to be tailored as the better player may have experienced boredom using this method as it may not have challenged the player enough, which could have been frustrating. During demonstrations for different shots within the sessions, questioning was adjusted to challenge ability within the group. For lesser ability individuals, easier questions were asked and in comparison for the better player harder questions were asked.

This method was useful during the placement. It allowed for variety within sessions and was considerate for the athletes. Through the different methods of differentiation it allowed for each athlete to be challenged according to their differing ability. Reflecting on the process of differentiation, it could only be as effective as the coach. If the coach struggled and did not judge either the abilities of the players or the time to differ the activities, then it would have created an unsuccessful session, which the athletes would not enjoy.

Communication is the exchanging of information through different mediums (Oxford Dictionary, 2010). Communicating to the participants in a coaching session can be difficult. The process can become more and more challenging as you climb the ability pyramid of athletes. When at the bottom with grass-root individuals, there is an element of immediate respect as they have come to your session to learn. If it is the coaching of elite athletes then the challenge maybe far greater, as the knowledge and experience of the athlete is already at a very high level. Potrac, Jones and Armour analysed an elite level coach in football through systematic observation and interviews (2002). Through their analysis of the coach, they discovered that no matter how qualified the coach was, if the athletes did not respect the coach or believe in what the coach was attempting to do with the athlete, the athletes were less likely to achieve. There is, consequently, no benefit from the coach trying to help the athlete in that situation. This notion Potrac et al. names ‘social power’ (2002).

The 20 hour placement is a grass-roots club for children to learn badminton. This means it could be easier to communicate with the children than if it was an elite club. This does not mean it was any less of a challenge as the coach needs to differentiate between each individual in the group. This concept, ‘social power’, needs to be channeled through the communication the coach has with their participants. Each athlete learns differently and to make the learning experience most effective, the coach needs to communicate with each individual successfully. Fleming and Mills produced VARK learning styles in 2001. VARK stands for Visual, Aural, Read/Write and Kinesthetic learning (Fleming & Mills, 2001). ‘Social power’ can be earned through a demonstration which incorporates these four learning styles. As hopefully, the coach will have, therefore, effectively communicated with all the participates within the group.

Using in-action and on-action reflection (Gilbert & Trudel, 2006) during the placement, the coach consistently analysed the way they communicated with the participants. Each participant had a different problem to solve. The better athlete, discussed in previous posts, had good technique but needed to improve the way they used the technique to produce the best performance they could. The other participants in the group including the beginner needed to improve their techniques. This called for demonstrations on how to perform the techniques. During the demonstrations the participants were given resources to read, visual aids, movements read to them and left to kinesthetically discover the correct movements. On-action reflection on this system aided the coach to observe, which type of learner each individual was and reduced the need for all the resources. This meant that each individual was able to learn in their own particular way, allowing for flexibility of learning in an enjoyable environment.

This method was efficient from the beginning, but it has the potential to make the sessions too complicated. Although this method considers the individual, time constraints can be an issue. There maybe too many activities being conducted within the sessions. Therefore, the participants could get bored or frustrated, as the coach is trying too much at once. This could have been simplified throughout the scheme of work, by focusing on a shot for a number of sessions and working around the learning styles over the time period.

Coaching with Reflective Practice – 1 of 3

This is the first posting of a blog about a 20 hour placement at a secondary school after-school badminton club. Within Gilbert and Trudel’s paper on reflective practice, they state there are three ways coaches can use reflective practice (2006). In-Action, On-Action and Retrospective Reflection-On-Action. In-Action reflection would be acted on events that are successful or unsuccessful during a session. On-Action is where the coach reflects on the session and uses this reflection to improve the next session. Retrospective Reflection-On-Action requires the coach to reflect over a series of sessions, potentially a season, and improve for the next season. Through reflective practice, pedagogy should improve for the coach, making themselves a better coach and improving students in the specialist subject area.

Reflective practice is, therefore, a way to analyse four themes within coaching. These themes include organisation, differentiation, communication and management. Within the Oxford Dictionary, organisation is a noun in which objects or events are arranged in a systematic way (2010, p.1252). Reflection of organisation looks at the preparation of sessions. Morley and Bailey present the process of differentiation, which is the ability to sort between sporting talents and ensure they have a successful learning experience (2006). Reflecting on differentiation explores whether activities within the session challenge each individual according to the level of their ability. Communication is the ability to exchange information by use of different mediums (Oxford Dictionary, 2010, p.352). Reflecting on the communication would look into whether the participants in the session understand all the information the coach exchanged from themselves to the participants. Winnick cites Walker, Shea and Bauer (2007) who define behavioral management as “actions [by] teachers … [to] engage in [and] to enhance the probability that children, individually and in groups, will develop effective behaviors that are personally fulfilling, productive and socially acceptable”(2011). Reflection on behaviour management would indicate whether the group within the session was in control and acted in a manner that would deem acceptable.

The next two posts and paragraphs will use both reflection and the four main themes, to analyse and critique the 20 hour placement undertaken within a local school.

This post will explore the theme of organisation within a 20 hour placement in a local school. Teachers experience training in “delivery methods, organisation and control, lesson planning, and elements of child development”(Lyle, 2005, p.10). Coaches usually obtain these skills when training to become coaches in their respected sport. Organisation, as defined in an earlier post, is a way of systematically arranging objects or events (Oxford Dictionary, 2010). Through coaching badges, sports coaches learn to organise sessions for children and adults through session plans, schemes of work, following health and safety regulations. Organisation can be reflected on using in-action, on-action and retrospective reflection-on-action (Gilbert & Trudel, 2006). Within this 20 hour placement, at an after-school badminton club for children aged between 11 to 18, on-action reflection was used each week to determine which activities deemed successful or unsuccessful.

Located on this blog is a needs analysis, scheme of work and session plans for a six week period. This illustrates that organisation was in place before and during coaching the after-school club. The Long Term Athlete Development (LTAD) programme is a concept to improve coaching athletes from children through to elite level (Balyi and Hamilton, 2004). This was used in the organisation phase for the set-up of the after-school club. Balyi and Hamilton state that athletes between the ages of eleven to eighteen are either in the ‘training to train’ or ‘training to compete’ phases. These stage objectives go from building an aerobic base, building strength and developing sport-specific skills to optimize fitness preparation and sport, individual and position-specific skills (Balyi & Hamilton, 2004). If this model was utilised on the after-school badminton group, it would be an unsuccessful club, due to the fact that the group is of mixed ability from beginner to intermediate level badminton. The varying ability, therefore, needed to be considered.

Ericsson’s theory rivals the Balyi and Hamilton theory, suggesting that the process of becoming an elite athlete in a given sport requires 10,000 hours of practice to be undertaken (1996). This is less detailed and does not look into keeping athletes within the sport, as it concentrates on getting athletes to elite level. This method would create very experienced badminton players, who have a great knowledge of the sport. However, this theory would require the after-school badminton club to be increasingly frequent in an attempt to gain as many hours as possible within a school setting. Furthermore, it may also lack enjoyment. If the athletes were asked to attend more regular training sessions, they may lose interest and quit. Intensive training that Ericsson suggests, is not appropriate for an after-school club.

Both these models give the coach a basis to organise their athletes, but encounter flaws. LTAD (using on-action reflection) expects too much of the children who may have started playing the sport at the start of high school, and would only be aged eleven. Ericsson’s 10,000 hours model does not consider the enjoyment of sport and the commitment children are willing to put into learning and successfully performing a sport. Reflection on both of these models points towards the fact that they would not fit an after-school badminton club. Using aspects of the models would help the organisation of planning the sessions for the club, but this would be performed through a needs analysis and not through intensive coaching of the participants.