3 blunders sports coaches make

Most common mistakes made by coaches

The collective sport of training age is of fundamental importance in the physical and psychosocial development of the person. Competitive practice may well be a stimulus for the child to grow hand in hand with values ​​such as effort, friendship or self-improvement, it may well be a limiting element if the training methods are not the suitable.

Both in the quarry sport and in the maturity stage, the style and techniques used by the coach affect both your own sports performance and personal areas such as self-esteem, belonging to the group wave self-perception of competences. Consequently, one of the main objectives of the Sports psychology is to detect which practices are positive or negative for athletes in order to modulate them and obtain better performance.

In this article I will detail a total of three errors in the management of sports teams that are usually observed in competitive sports. These errors are usually based on strategies and methodologies that do not understand the psychological reality of athletes in certain game circumstances. Thanks to the continuous study in this field of sports psychology, sports professionals already have the guidelines for achieve reorient training strategies in search of the best results, both sports and cohesion group.

1. Hot Hand / Cold Hand

Much studied in team sports such as basketball, Hot Hand effect (hot hand) is the sports side of the Gambler's Fallacy in games of chance and cards.

What is the Hot Hand Effect about? When a player has a streak of three consecutive pitches, the coach tends to give instructions to the other players so that it is the player with the streak that is played the next threw. This is a common mistake because, although it is counterintuitive, the chances of success in the present launch are not increased by past events.

Beyond a positive scoring streak, the challenge for the coach is to keep a cool head and understand to what extent the player gusty can maintain that level of success, either due to its ability to grow under pressure or, on the contrary, it can be seen affected by an excess of pressure and euphoria, coming to force shots with the added handicap of defenders more attentive to their movements.

In short, the Hot Hand Effect is nothing more than a cognitive fallacy. The decision to continue betting on the gusty player should not be based on the endorsement deceptively provided by past events.

2. Positive reinforcement

Many of the athletes who read this second point will feel identified with the following sentence: "Guys, if we win the next three games, I invite you to dinner." This offer, made by the coach, may have a negligible positive effect on the extrinsic motivation of the players. However, intrinsic motivation ends up diminishing, due to two reasons:

to) The award for which victories are reinforced does not enhance the value of the sporting and group growth process but the simple achievement of goals. This is interpreted by the athlete in the following way: "It does not matter learning to play, it does not matter ethics, it does not matter respect for my teammates and rivals. It only matters to win. " Consequently, the final score (also dependent on external circumstances such as the quality of the rivals) is prioritized with respect to the process of technical, tactical, psychological improvement and cohesion of the group.

b) The award is shown as something alien to sport; sport is interpreted not as an end but as a means. This circumstance also has the effect of reducing the intrinsic motivation of the players.

Positive reinforcement, as we see, should be applied as an extra, and taking the sport itself as motivation. For example, you can try to increase the extrinsic motivation of the group by inviting them to watch a match of a top team of the same sport. (prize not external to the sport) if they manage to train with good intensity and make a learning move during the games (the process is rewarded, not the Outcome).

3. Authoritative coach

There is a coach profile that barely grants feedback your players; if only the star player. It is only able to offer negative reinforcement when players fail or do not understand a tactical concept, but it is difficult to see them in the task of correcting with precise and calm.

These practices provoke the team from tactical confusion (such as not knowing why a specific play is used in a circumstance determined of the game), to problems of lack of confidence, which in the end generate that the potential of the players is seen remarkably depleted.

How can the coach anticipate these problems? Establishing a climate of trust and communication with the players; trying to use corrections in a positive tone if someone makes a mistake, without pointing out the culprits and generally maintaining an egalitarian and constructive group dynamic.