Under Age Coaching

[dowling]

Does anyone think there is still room for independent thinking coaching kids or is the uniformity of coaching the way to go? Because some one has done foundation and coching levels does that instantly make them a better coach than some one who hasn't? If a club wants to attract kids it might play up that they have 'qualified' coaches as in those who have done the courses of the Association so if for some reason some one has been coaching for quite a while but has never done the courses for whatever reason should they be looked upon as a coach of lesser ability.

[screenexile]

It most certainly does not make them a lesser coach. But if you had someone within your club who was a very good coach would you not try to get them on a Foundation or a level 1 Course?

Your point on uniformity of coaching is also way off the mark. I've done foundation and level 1 and everyone is encouraged to put their own slant on any ideas. There is a lot of brainstorming and talking about what works well for different people and we are all encouraged to try everything and see what works for us.

[lynchbhoy]

like courses in industry - these are usually seen to be the benchmarks for people to be able to do their job.
However, a lot of the time in the IT industry for example, people have done whatever degree, masters, MCSE, etc etc courses and they still can hardly switch a computer on and you couldnt trust them to do anythin gmeaningful - even with a few years experience.
Some get a grasp of things faster than others with or without courses.
But in looking for work, these courses are the yardstick you will be measured by.

In regards to Football (and prob hurling also) I know that people looking to take clubs have been asked if they have coaching courses. These are people who have played, lived and breathed the game and have experience with teams and clubs for quite some time.
They were made to feel slightly inferior because they had not done coaching courses.

I dont know anything about them but if its like refereeing, they are goiid to a point but are never fully practical or realistic.
Same with some IT courses I have been on - I thought that some of the ethos and points taught in them would never NEVER work or be reflected in most work scnarios.


A training course in whatever it is , in my opinion is just a tool to give you more food for thought and provoke ideas etc. If you were completely clueless about how to coach then they are for you, but they shouldnt be the be all and end all - merely the starting point.

I wonder if the winning All Ireland intercounty or club managers all have these coaching courses (before they became successful?).

[theskull1]

IMO you will always take something away from a coaching course....so if you are willing to accept you don't know everything then you should attend them when you get the chance and don't dwell on the slip of paper at the end of it.

[AZOffaly]

Treat them as idea shops. You never stop learning I think, and it's always good to swap ideas.

[ballymac]

Coaches of under age teams should have attended certain courses, i.e child protection and foundation course before they are allowed to coach a team, they also should have been vetted by their club, access NI. They should also attend the various courses that are run by the GAA to give them an idea of how and what to coach.

However, none of these courses make a good coach bad, but they can make a bad coach better. They are there as a guide and there are lots of ideas on websites in books etc but the end result is to make it interesting and fun for young players to improve their football/hurling skills.

So Dowling in regard to your post and are non qualified coaches thought of as a lesser coach, I think coaches of young players are rated by parents in respect to the reaction/ interaction that coach has with their kids. But any coach should have at least foundation course obtained.

[dowling]

I take all the points on board and I suppose the question I'm posing is has too much importance been attached to coaching courses? Would we not have any good under age coaches if there wasn't this blueprint for coaching? An issue that needs to be examined maybe is how many young people are doing these courses and coaching kids to have something placed on a cv? I appreciate we can always learn and take something from coaching courses but surely how that's applied is down to how astute the individual is. And would that not mean that the strength is in the individual coach rather than the courses?
Ballymac I don't wish to presume you're implying that coaches who haven't done courses are bad but surely doing a course doesn't necessarily mean some one is automatically a good coach. I'm sure every club has individuals who think they are the next best thing because they've done certain courses and maybe been involved with certain high profile figures but in reality couldn't coach to save their lives.
I appreciate the element of taking what's learned and adapting it to suit but surely a skill of coaching under age is being able to understand and motivate kids in different ways and relative to the individual by being able to read the kids and recognising their individual needs.
And in spite of everyone maybe adapting the courses everyone is still working from a blue print so why is everyone not on a par now or is it just too early?

[brokencrossbar1]

Dowling, there is an element of truth in what you are saying but the reality is that whether or not the courses are available you will still have good coaches and you will still have bad coaches, the idea of the courses is simply to pull together what is already being practice on fields across the country.  The tick box level of a Foundation course is geared towards the fathers/mothers etc who want to help out with little Johnny's team but they themselves were never invovled in the sport.  As the courses progress so does the level of the coaches taking the courses so it is very much reflective of the participants. 

The reality is that it evens things out sometimes in a good way and sometimes in a bad way but that is down more so to the clubs/teams/coaches involved as opposed to the Coaching courses.  Give me an enthusiastic and positive coach with a foundation level qualification but with a lifetime of experience anyday but that's just my opinion.

[sheamy]

Spot on BC1. I see these as a leveling out mechanism. The Ballinderry's and Crossmaglen's will have coaches coming out their ears because that's just the way they're run. The 'low-level' ones are essentially about getting more people involved and it's a good thing. The more advanced ones also serve a good purpose in that you can pick up a nugget or two you never thought of before. One worryingly development however (for me at least) was the idea of a GAA degree! 

I shit you not...now that's just ridiculous. At a time when we're discussing 'the cancer in the GAA', is it really a good idea to be bringing the terminology of degrees and qualifications into the mix??

[ballymac]

Hi Dowling, I did not imply or mean to imply that coaches who havent done a course are bad. I was trying to say that doing a course will do no harm, it may make a bad coach better and may not improve a good coach is what I am getting at.
What is this blueprint you talk of ? Are you talking about the range of courses from foundation up to level 2 and beyond approaching the 'degree' that sheamy mentions. I would suggest that they are a guide to the minimum standard you should be looking at. Let me clarify that a bit more. This would apply to dealing with the younger under age teams. As BC1 says this helps parents/ helpers get involved and gives them a guide to the type of training/coaching. They will learn more watching a confident experienced coach and if they have no previous playing experience then this course will be of great value. As you progress through the older youth teams and into senior footballers the more advanced courses deal with training techniques for these teams. As BC1 says the type of individual attending these courses tends to be the more dedicated footballer/coach.

But I would say that these courses are all about training or teaching the technical side of the game. This is vitally important in todays game as technically everyone has moved on so much and in a way Dowling we are all on a par in that repect. What can not be taught on a course is management and reading your opposition and making the switches during a game to turn it around. That is down to having something that can not be taught on a course.

[Zulu]

I've done a few of these courses and recently did the tutor course so I'm now qualified to hold these courses for the foundation and level 1 stage and you are taught to let the participating coaches problem solve themselves rather than provide them with the answers. I think most coaches get something from them, even if it is pitched to coaches well below you're level, I certainly did anyway. Coaching is like anything, you can have qualifications coming out your ear and be useless or brilliant without ever doing an official course. The courses will certainly help but your coaching ability is part natural talent and part hard work.