The Teesra

Author: Andrew Beaven

  • The quest for physical literacy – why it matters for cricket coaches

    This autumn we are very lucky to have a full team of qualified coaches working with our Colts section.  Not only does this mean that the volunteer coaches get the chance to work with more experienced coaches, it also means that we have the luxury of occasionally taking a step back from running a session to actively observe what is going in.

    And some of the things we have seen, even in the warm-ups, have confirmed a growing suspicion about the fundamental athletic abilities, such as speed, strength and agility, demonstrated by our players.

    We are working with a group of talented young cricketers who are not always equally talented athletes.

    But a series of observations that confirm a suspicion only poses the question – what can we, as cricket coaches, do to help our cricketers to become (better) athletes at the same time as developing their technical, tactical and psychological cricketing skills?  We are cricket coaches, not track and field, or gymnastics.

    So I was very lucky to attend a breakfast workshop recently with Kelvin Giles, where he addressed the topic of physical literacy.  And the more I heard, the more I became convinced that basic physical literacy could be the answer to our (cricket-related) athlete development challenge.

    (more…)

  • Telling it like it is – communication matters

    An article in the Sydney Morning Herald provoked an interesting discussion on LinkedIn about the importance of communication for the coach.

    The article featured descriptions of individual batsmen’s techniques, including in-depth analysis of (perceived) technical flaws.

    To be fair to Neil D’Costa, the Aussie coach who came in for some criticism on the LinkedIn group, the descriptions look to me to contain pretty accurate diagnostic pen pictures, highlighting diversions from the “orthodox” technical models that we all refer back to.  We could argue about the remedies proposed, but I think the potential technical issues have been clearly identified.

    Whether they have been communicated adequately or appropriately is a different matter, however.

    (more…)

  • Numbers that matter – contributions that don’t show up in the averages

    An interesting question posted by Shamus Robertson to the LinkedIn Cricket Coaches Worldwide group on LinkedIn – can we quantify the intangible contributions that do not normally not show up in the averages?

    …if our top 6 all averaged 50+ would the hundreds matter?

    Averages can only tell part of the story.  Is a score of 350+ (6×50+, plus a few runs from the tail) going to be enough?  Can you score the runs quickly enough to bowl the opposition out, twice?

    More important than absolute numbers must be the context – runs scored to win (or save) a game are (should be) worth more than runs scored in a draw.

    Supporting a team mate through a long innings, and backing up in the field – not recorded in the score-book, and rarely acknowledged in match reports.  But these are the contributions that are missing from a less successful team.

    Off-the-field contributions count for a lot, too, especially away from the professional game.  Turning up on time makes a big difference on match day, and being available every week saves the skipper from wasting his week filling up the team sheet for Saturday.

    We should be recognising the overall contribution of our players, and not just the runs scored and wickets taken (important as these are).  But how to devise a contribution scale that combines the quantitative (averages, aggregates, results) with the qualitative?  Does it even need an objective component? (more…)