Time to Look at Quality Rather Than Quantity

The world of coaching has changed dramatically in the last 30 years.

If the age-old quote that claimed your were not a good manager until you had been sacked is true there must be a hell of a lot of outstanding coaches, so you would think we would have a production line of talent. Nowadays at the top end of sport, if you are sacked it is more likely you are set up for life.

It was however former Chelsea, Manchester United and Scotland Manager Tommy Doherty who summed it up best when he said “People ask me what makes a great manager and I say it is good players. Crap players get you the sack, it’s as simple as that.”

There is currently a review into the youth development of footballers in Australia. As new FFA Technical Director Rob Sherman was quoted as saying in an interview with a Football West Staffer, “historically, the men have made the Round of 16 once, women have made the quarter-finals three times. Could we eclipse that? That should be the long-term vision. Could we actually get semi-final for the women, quarters for the men? To do that you actually need players in the top leagues. And that has diminished massively since 2006. And they are not at the top clubs in the top leagues and that’s got to be a concern.”

It is no coincidence that the date he quotes is 2006, as this was just after the FFA was formed (2005).

As followers of the game in Australia are well aware, those who came into the FFA to run the game slowly dismantled all that had led to Australia qualifying for the 2006 World Cup, and making the round of 16. That same year the Matildas made the final in their first ever AFC Women’s Asian Cup, they went onto win it in 2010. So why did they instigate so many changes? Australian football was on the right track in terms of development.

One of the first things that the FFA did was introduce Coach education and coach accreditation. The education element was much needed as there had been few courses run outside the East Coast for a number of years.

The accreditation issue, apart from being a revenue stream has opened a can of worms. Anyone who manages to complete a coaching course and receive their certificate now thinks that they are ready to coach, some are, some definitely are not. To make matters worse having shelled out money to obtain their certificate they now believe that they are entitled to charge for their services. We have a glut of coaches with accreditation and clubs and schools have to wade through a sea of applicants and try and work out who is good and who isn’t.

Football is not alone in instigating such a system, which is great for coaches with aspirations to coach at the highest level, but it is questionable for those at the bottom end of the game.

A recent conversation with someone well versed in employment law questioned whether non-professional Football clubs could insist that coaches have certain coaching accreditation. They said that when advertising they would be wise to state that it “would be desirable.” They went on to say that as with most jobs the employer may state the qualification that they are looking for but should not close the door on those who have experience in line with that qualification, as long as they can demonstrate that.

They went on to say that they felt that the current system is possibly outside of the law and that these are “unfair employment practices because of mandatory qualifications.”

Which certainly puts a very different spin on the whole coaching accreditation situation. Certainly the game has a lost a great many experienced coaches from the game since accreditation came in, as they were not prepared to spend the money to coach at a level where they were not paid, or simply paid ‘beer money.’ This has been a huge loss to the game and one that was heavily underestimated.

The interesting thing to look at is why coaching courses started. They were a means of sharing information in the pre-internet days. The only way a coach could learn was to read other coaching books, watch and talk to other coaches. These courses were used to share ideas and information. That open discourse has disappeared and in many cases they are now used to dictate how things should be done; as we saw with the FFA Curriculum.

It was interesting to read Rob Sherman allude to the FFA bringing in Coaching academy accreditation. This has always made more sense than making coaches have to be accredited. He was quoted as saying, “in terms of the European model particularly, there’s an accreditation system. So clubs are asked to meet certain benchmarks and they get accredited.” He went on to state “So my feeling is we need to adopt something similar where we challenge our clubs to reach the standard they think they can reach and we give them the accreditation accordingly. Then people will know the standard has been met.”

The follow up question that probably should have been asked at that point in time, but wasn’t for obvious reasons, was, should clubs be forced to meet certain criteria or reach a certain standard with their accreditation before they are allowed to play in the highest competition?

It would seem that Sherman is more in favour of a system whereby clubs are rightly rewarded for their form on the pitch. They may have to have a development program, but one that fits in with their long term plan and finances at their club. As long as they achieve the benchmarks at the level that they feel they can achieve, they will be accredited. It will then be up to the parents to decide which club’s development program they feel best suits their child. Or if the system is working properly, the club will have gone out and identified the players they want to add to those that they have developed over the years who are coming through their junior ranks already.

Sherman, was smart with his answers but also made some very pertinent points. He knows that he will be judged on results. He made it clear that clubs should not have a five or 10 year plan, it needs to be a 20 year plan. We have seen the damage those early decisions made by the powerbrokers in the FFA made, decisions that have set the game back, and it will take at least ten years to turn it around. There is no magic fix, there are so many components that need to be aligned for the system to now be fixed.

Sherman bravely went against the comments thrown out by his employer, the FFA and other administrators across the country when he said “a good measure of the game is how many people stay in it, not only how many partake in it.” It is not about participation numbers, Iceland is a case in point compared to many of their European counterparts. They would not have as many players as many of their European counterparts but they have managed to produce quality, competitive players. In Australia, despite the growth in participation numbers the standard of players has declined. The pertinent question is with more players and more accredited coaches are we producing better players?

Like many sports the drop out rate amongst teenagers is high. One reason is the cost, so what is being done to lower the cost of playing football? Another key reason the drop out level is so high is many have been told that they are “on the pathway,” only then to be told their journey on the path has come to an end. Many lack the resilience to push on. They simply put their boots away and move to another sport.

At 16 you may lack the physical attributes to play at that level, but by 20 you may have them? Sadly with many we will never know because as one coach who wished to remain nameless said to this writer, “they lack the passion.” He went on to explain that they are “fans of the game, not students of it, few have a passion for the game.” The passion that sees them kicking a ball on their own every chance they get to improve themselves as a player.

One term that should be binned is the term “pathway.” A path is something that sees regular traffic. It is a well-worn route from “A” to “B.” Yet if we look at the number of young players currently on the “Pathway” very, very few have made it to the ultimate destination. If Australia finds a system that is successful and every year players who have come through that development program are being snapped up by top clubs around the world, maybe then we have a right to call it a “pathway.”

The review panel appointed by Sherman has some wise heads on it, Ron Smith, Craig Moore and Michael Cooper, along with representatives from Hyundai A-League clubs in Steven McGarry, Kelly Cross, Drew Sherman and Ian Crook. From a playing perspective one can understand the appointment of Craig Moore, however with him being a player agent there is the potential for accusations of a conflict of interest. It may also have been wiser to have had more independent voices than the A-League club representatives, but no doubt that was politics coming into play. That aside there is plenty of knowledge sat around the table. It is unfair to judge until the recommendations have been published.

Rob Sherman has spoken a lot of sense and has put the wheels in motion for change. He undoubtedly has a tough job ahead of him, but if he can instigate a shift in culture and bring back some of the wise coaching heads that were forced from the game he could well stop the youth development ship listing, get it back on an even keel, and into smoother waters. We wish him well.