just reading alot lately about coaches and there skills

so just to garner opinions( i'm bored )

 would you

a: go to a coach who has lots of qualifications/is to much emphasis being placed on paper qualifications?

b: go to a coach who you know has none but has successfully coached


  • I would be more inclined to be coached by someone who has done what I want to do, rather than someone who studied it and may not have actually ever done anything

    So B 

  • I would be inclined to go to a coach who understands ME and how to coach ME as opposed to a far superior/younger/male/faster person or worse has coached someone slower/older/rubbish etc etc 

    I have been coached by folks who were used to a higher calibre of athlete and I got injured (avoidably I  now know).   At the same time my coach at the moment is on the cautious side which is also a bit frustrating although I am injury free which is good. 

    It also depends what those paper qualifications are.  Some are good - some are rubbish.  Most atheltic qualifications have practical elements so you shouldn't be the first for them to trial on.  Howver someone who has been coaching for a while might be using outdated methods that may have been proved to be harmful or not know about things that have recently been promoted after lots of good research/trials have proved them to be superb and helpful.  

    Knowledge is Power after all. Whether it is practical or theoretical  

  • thats the feed back from most people

    so why i wonder do uka keep pushing qualifications?

    surely it would be better to get rid of the paperwork and to hold more get togethers where coaches share idea's, then take them back and adapt them to suit there individual athletes

    for all our higher paper qualified coaches our performances are not improving( apart from the odd few)

    or is it simply were giving the athlete's to much to soon ?

  • Because is you don't have some sort of system how on earth do you guarantee any level of ability or acheivement or ability in coaching. It's not so simple that it can just be left to chance and by pushing qualifications you can hopefully get the old dinosaurs to go back, refresh and make sure they are still talking sense and not just doing the same old outdated nonsense that they have been pushing for years with no evidence it works other than 'but that;t the way we always do it'. You will always get poor coaches and you will always have newbies - but eveyone has to start somewhere. And at the very least if the qualifications teach them the basics then they will hopefully have a bit of knowledge and an idea where to start.   No-one leaves school, uni. college etc etc with all the skills they need or will eventually develop with exeperience and time.

    Can you tell i am bitter and twisted? 

    Like doctors, dentists, nurses.......  Do you want someone who knows what they are doing and have been trained with proper qualifications or are you happy to go with someone who has just been doing it a while - mmm.

  • so why arn't we getting the results?

    out dated nonsense? no eveidance it works?would that be the nonsense that produced olympic medalists

    i'm coming from this at a middle distance angle but also our shot putters/discus throwes/pole vaulters were superior 20/30 years ago

    or is it that our youngsters just arn't hungry enough?

  • I think that's it. There are far too many other distractions kids are into nowadays (Wii, play station, texting their mates every 5 minutes).

    Where I live, on Friday evening our swim training has to be early, because at 6pm the pool is turned over to the water polo mob - it's very refreshing to see the literally dozens of kids, all ages down to little toddlers, pouring into the building.

  • out dated nonsense? no eveidance it works?would that be the nonsense that produced olympic medalists

    No, I am talking about my own woeful experience with an outdated coach who didn't believe in doing outrageous things like reading books on technique!  I am in no way commenting on our athletics performance on the world stage as i have no interest/authority to do so.  You asked what seemed to me to be a no-brainer of a question. I obviously am coming at this from a COMPLETELY different angle than you are.  i am thinking amateur you are obviously thinking pro. 

    I think you may have misread my earlier post OR x-posted. i am firmly in favour of qualifications.  no doubt whatsoever in my mind.  If someone is a good coach with lots of experience - great, then getting the qualifications should be a doddle.

  • I don't know why we aren't producing but I doubt it is simply down to having coaches that spend too much of their time reading thoery.

    I don't know if you guys saw the little bit in the news about the lad who qualified for the synchornised diving. He commented that his pals thought he had no life and that he had made a lot of sacrifices to get to where he was.  When i was a lass (Oooo so long ago) there was b*gger all to do and if you were in swimming or running or whatever then that was your only outlet.  There weren't a million clubs and activities to split up your time into the way my children do now. 

  • Hi all! A rather difficult question, but for myself I would choose a person who is a good coach not on paper, but in practice. I recently read a blog treadmillexpressplus and there I found quite a lot of useful information about this and I think it will be useful for you to take a look there and maybe you can even find the answer
Sign In or Register to comment.