Coaching player decision making in rugby union: exploring coaches espoused theories and theories in use as an indicator of effective coaching practice

Figures & data

Table 1. Background information of Premiership Regional Academy rugby union coaches.

Coach	Playing level	Years coaching	Age group	System goals
1	International	3	Under 18 lead coach & senior academy backs coach	To progress at least 3 players into the senior academy.
2	Championship	13	Academy head coach	33% best in the world. 33% best in the country. 33% academy graduates.
3	Premiership	3	Senior academy lead coach & under 18 forwards coach	To progress at least 3 players onto first XV contracts. To support all players to meet their potential.
4	National League	18	Assistant academy Manager and lead under 16 coach	Progress two players per year from the Junior Academy into the senior Academy. To support all players to meet their potential.
5	Premiership	14	Under 18 lead coach & senior academy forwards coach	To get as many players from the Under 18’s programme into the senior academy as possible. To develop every individual as a person.

Table 2. Categorisation of learning activities and coach behaviours as intentional, incidental and unclassified training approaches to develop player decision making.

Intentional	Incidental	Unclassified
Behaviours	Behaviours	Behaviours
Positive model	Divergent questioning	General feedback
Negative model	Silence on task	Humour
Corrective feedback		Praise
Specific feedback		Hustle
Instruction		Punishment
Convergent Questioning		Scold
		Response to question
		Confer with assistant coaches
		Silence off task
Learning Activities	Learning Activities	Learning Activities
Individual	Small sided activities	Transitions
Paired	Larger sided activities
Drill	Possession games
Phase of play	Conditioned games

Table 3. Deductive Thematic analysis of Premiership Regional Academy rugby union coaches’ proposed espoused theories regarding the incidental and intentional strategies they use to support the development of player decision-making.

Prescribed theme	Higher order theme	Lower order theme	Example from raw data	CPPRF
Espoused theories	Incidental (33)	Representativeness (10)	‘I think that they need to be, well the training environment needs to be as specific as it can be because we’re trying to make sure that they’re actions are always in conjunction with their perception.’ Coach 2	Learning activity
		Exaggeration of game information (5)	‘Exaggerate the cues for players and guide them to game information.’ Coach 1	Learning activity
		Manipulation of constraints (7)	‘You can change how the attacking player receives the ball and where. Are you just starting with it, do you choose where you want to start. Which I would generally guide them to a starting position based on their most favoured side to step off. Little things like that. Changing the boundaries, where the ball starts, how it comes to you, don’t limit their range of options. So you’ll hear a lot ‘don’t kick in this game’, every option that is available to them in a game should be available to them then. 1 vs 1 there may be times where we build that into 2 vs 1, 3 vs 2 and it becomes 15 vs 15 and it resembles a full game. Don’t limit options and make it realistic.’ Coach 4	Learning activity
		Player ownership (5)	‘Also giving them ownership, to help them make effective decisions you’ve got to allow them to make those decisions themselves.’ Coach 3	Player engagement
		Problem setting (6)	‘A lot of self-discovery, so yeah I know it’s a bit of a cliché, ah right questioning again. But in terms of learning it’s so much more powerful. It’s probably something that I didn’t really realise as a player that my coaches were doing it. I used to think, why are they not just telling me?’ Coach 3	Learning activity
	Intentional (106)	Specific feedback (37)	‘Off field definitely tends to be more detailed, but I think to be a really great coach you have to be able to offer that detailed specific feedback then and there on the field, in the moment. Which I’m working towards, sometimes it’s a confidence thing with me and I say it to them but try and prise that information from them.’ Coach 3	Coach behaviour
		Guidance of perception (12)	‘So, a big thing we’d identified was his ability to scan the defensive picture. Instead of just getting up and reload, it was right get up reload, look up, explore the opportunity and if it wasn’t on go and look for work. The key middle ground was the scanning.’ Coach 3	Coach behaviour
		Instruction (2)	‘In other situations, I’ve been going with some direct instructions, like this is where you need to run.’ Coach 2	Coach behaviour
		Questioning (10)	‘You try and remove that, and create a safe environment to try things, you might then question them to justify why they make certain decisions’ Coach 4	Coach behaviour
		Repetition (6)	‘I think players learn from experience so the more you revisit that game information in those pressure environments and do things well and make mistakes, the more you put them in that scenario, and they develop an understanding and awareness of what’s appropriate, the more they will make better decisions in future.’ Coach 5	Learning activity
		Shared mental model (25)	‘I think that if a team has a shared mental model of what we’re trying to do and achieve we’re trying to engage players in team-based decision-making rather than individual based decision-making and I think that the shared ‘common language’ means that there’s a clarity in what we’re trying to do as a group and I think that supports team-based decision-making. Everyone needs to see and communicate what our intentions are – so listening is just as important’ Coach 2	Player engagement
		Vicarious experiences (role models) (2)	‘I think his own identification of some of the players he looked up too, so he saw **** as somebody he looked up too and wanted to play like as he believed he had a lot of similar characteristics’ Coach 2	Player engagement
		Video analysis (18)	‘But then in the season, it’s a constant balance between out intentions, off – field video, on field practice and then review work in the classroom, which tends to be well did we make the appropriate decisions to get out of it what we wanted from those games. The time of year would definitely play a role in it, probably less significantly in terms of the time of year, we have to make some in the moment snap judgements on how we feel that particular tactic, strategy or decisions are going.’ Coach 5	Learning activity

[Numbers in brackets denote the number of times this theme was referenced during interviews].

Table 4. Systematic observation of coaches theories in use – learning activities.

Learning activity	Coach 1	Coach 1%	Coach 2	Coach 2%	Coach 3	Coach 3%	Coach 4	Coach 4%	Coach 5	Coach 5%	Total (n)	Total (%)
Paired	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	4.00	5.56	3.00	4.62	7.00	7.61	14.00	4.38
Drill	2.00	4.55	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	7.00	7.61	9.00	2.81
Small-sided activities	4.00	9.09	8.00	17.02	8.00	11.11	16.00	24.62	0.00	0.00	36.00	11.25
Freeze in position	0.00	0.00	9.00	19.15	0.00	0.00	2.00	3.08	0.00	0.00	11.00	3.44
Player huddle	21.00	47.73	16.00	34.04	30.00	41.67	34.00	52.31	49.00	53.26	150.00	46.88
Larger activities	2.00	4.55	0.00	0.00	6.00	8.33	0.00	0.00	5.00	5.43	13.00	4.06
Transition	2.00	4.55	6.00	12.77	5.00	6.94	3.00	4.62	7.00	7.61	23.00	7.19
Phase of play	9.00	20.45	4.00	8.51	16.00	22.22	0.00	0.00	14.00	15.22	43.00	13.44
Possession game	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	4.17	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	3.00	0.94
Conditioned game	4.00	9.09	4.00	8.51	0.00	0.00	7.00	10.77	3.00	3.26	18.00	5.63
Total	44.00	100.00	47.00	100.00	72.00	100.00	65.00	100.00	92.00	100.00

Table 5. Systematic observation of coaches theories in use – coach behaviour’s.

Behaviour (n)	Coach 1	Coach 1 (%)	Coach 2	Coach 2 (%)	Coach 3	Coach 3 (%)	Coach 4	Coach 4 (%)	Coach 5	Coach 5 (%)	Total (n)	Total (%)
Positive model	21.00	5.24	5.00	1.36	10.00	1.74	5.00	0.73	16.00	2.13	57.00	2.05
Negative model	2.00	0.50	1.00	0.27	2.00	0.35	0.00	0.00	7.00	0.93	12.00	0.43
Corrective feedback	18.00	4.49	37.00	10.05	35.00	6.08	47.00	6.90	103.00	13.73	240.00	8.62
Specific feedback	34.00	8.48	26.00	7.07	80.00	13.89	49.00	7.20	36.00	4.80	225.00	8.08
General feedback	20.00	4.99	4.00	1.09	8.00	1.39	4.00	0.59	24.00	3.20	58.00	2.08
Instruction	71.00	17.71	96.00	26.09	127.00	22.05	240.00	35.24	214.00	28.53	748.00	26.87
Humour	9.00	2.24	0.00	0.00	12.00	2.08	19.00	2.79	1.00	0.13	41.00	1.47
Praise	85.00	21.20	21.00	5.71	130.00	22.57	43.00	6.31	46.00	6.13	325.00	11.67
Hustle	10.00	2.49	14.00	3.80	31.00	5.38	45.00	6.61	49.00	6.53	149.00	5.35
Punishment	1.00	0.25	0.00	0.00	1.00	0.17	5.00	0.73	2.00	0.27	9.00	0.32
Scold	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	4.00	0.69	1.00	0.15	23.00	3.07	28.00	1.01
Response to question	18.00	4.49	6.00	1.63	15.00	2.60	24.00	3.52	26.00	3.47	89.00	3.20
Confer with assistants	19.00	4.74	0.00	0.00	31.00	5.38	19.00	2.79	22.00	2.93	91.00	3.27
Convergent Questioning	29.00	7.23	113.00	30.71	48.00	8.33	82.00	12.04	139.00	18.53	421.00	15.12
Divergent Questioning	40.00	9.98	28.00	7.61	18.00	3.13	63.00	9.25	29.00	3.87	178.00	6.39
Silence – on task	24.00	5.99	17.00	4.62	22.00	3.82	34.00	4.99	13.00	1.73	110.00	3.95
Silence – off task	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	2.00	0.35	1.00	0.15	0.00	0.00	3.00	0.11
Total	401.00	100.00	368.00	100.00	576.00	100.00	681.00	100.00	750.00	100.00

Table 6. Deductive Thematic analysis of Premiership Regional Academy rugby union coaches’ theories in use when developing player decision making.

Prescribed theme	Higher order theme	Lower order theme	Example from raw data
Coaching methods	Common frame of reference (SMM) (86)	Common language (30)	So people can make effective decisions for other people. That’s one of the best examples of it, a winger makes the decision to make the decision for their number 10, before he’s even caught the ball, or even had the chance to look up and interpret what he’s making a decision on, the wingers use of that terminology has already made the decision for him immediately. That terminology makes the process time much shorter, if the 10 chooses to listen and act as asked. Terminology increases the speed of processing information, as other players always have more time and opportunity to look. So, to have one clear call for one specific action, if everyone understands it, knows it and is on the same page with it then its like that (click of the fingers).If you don’t have that language, then there could be multiple words or multiple things that you could say that makes that time bigger, and you may have different views on what those terms mean. Coach 3
		Tactical framework (29)	Obviously because we’re playing 2’s [A framework of four pods of 2 forwards across the width of the pitch], we always need an extra man to ruck if we take the ball into contact. When we play off ten, the man out of the back should look after the ruck, but when we play off 9, 2’s off 9, we need one player to double ruck. So in this case it was the man out of the back, I think it was **** who didn’t execute their role. So I asked who’s missing here? To see if he knew if it was his responsibility. Coach 1
		IF-THEN rules (27)	So the information to attack in our own 22, so on a kick off we attack all the time unless the weather’s poor. Then from scrum, same unless we are on our own 5 m line, then there’s a decision to be made as there may be too much risk. They do have the freedom to play. Also, their decision should be made in reference to the score, the weather, so if we have wind in our face then we cannot kick, so instead we have to keep the ball and run it. If we haven’t got decent momentum in three phases, then we kick. Coach 1
	Learning activities (140)	Exaggeration of game information (41)	Because, with players at this age and stage I’ve designed this to further exaggerate what they would see on the pitch. So it might not be immediately obvious where the defence are or the positions they’re taking without that picture being exaggerated, so in this I told the defence that they have to be very wide or very narrow. Coach 2
		Variability (9)	I changed the pitch dimensions to add to task variability. So, by increasing the width of the pitch you’re adding and changing the task variability, so if you take the action in the practice away from being very massed and similar to a little bit more variable. Coach 2
		Manipulation of constraints (21)	So, you mentioned ‘beat the game’, where’s that come from? What’s the purpose? It’s come from listening to, well I know the origins are actually a **** thing. It’s not the phrase that I would use a lot to be honest, but I think it frame this practice quite nicely for the lads. It gives them a, it terms of the context of the game, there is a deliberate plan to guide player’s decision making behaviour, there’s a rule that’s running throughout them all which is consistent, bit of reward based, if you make these decisions well in the right moment you’ll get the ball back sort of thing. Coach 4
		Player huddles (43)	Yeah so I hadn’t thought about it like that before, I guess it’s reflection – how did it go? Diagnosis – the players break their decision-making down and if they miss it I would. Then set future goals for performance for the next game. So say if the player’s bring in a new lineout, I’d probably make them walk through it first, for clarity and detail on roles and responsibilities, ask them how they think it went and then run through it against opposition and ask them how they think it went again. Coach 3.
		Representativeness (24)	Different widths for the attacking and defence, different spaces to play into. Here I’m trying to replicate here a one phase scenario they will be presented with in the game, if we start on the line this is not a game scenario, so the ruck needs to be positive or negative and the attackers and defenders need to fold round the corner. You keep the different start points, just make the ruck more variable. Coach 1
		Walk through’s (3)	So like we spoke about earlier, he didn’t need to go to big picture stuff because it was already established, but if you’re going to bring in a new shape off 9, or a new framework in phase play, my first response is always to walk through it first. So on this clip, it’s the first time they’ve done it, or considered what their role is so if we were doing a new shape off 9, I would coach it the same way. Coach 3.
		Video analysis (16)	We watched them before the game and analysed the way they set up on launch defence. We noticed that they were overfolding, so that’s why we decided to come back down the shortside. Coach 1
	Coach behaviour’s (134)	Feedback (16)	Put a bit of pressure on them. It’s not necessarily gone to plan, as I wanted them to be more successful than that because they’ve got a big game at the weekend and I wanted them to go into it with confidence but, there’s a reality here that they’ve had four unsuccessful line outs which in a game, would hand the opposition four possessions of the ball. So really I’m inexplicitly talking to the lineout caller almost saying ‘I’m just reminding you, that you haven’t made good decisions on the last four, so what is your go too decision to get us back on track and build some confidence again and break the momentum. Coach 3
		Instruction (19)	This player **** is one of our best and most developed players, he knows this through and through. So if I asked him where the space was or what the right decision was he’d just say what I was going to say. He knows so I tell him. His game intelligence and understanding is at a premiership level. Coach 1
		Listening (3)	It shows that as a coach you’re listening to what they’re saying, open to their collective solution to what you’ve asked them to do, check so that’s what you’ve said now how have you actioned it or were you even actioning it? Coach 4.
		Praise (15)	Well I’m praising the specific process beforehand. What led to that outcome, it’s also a serious work on for him. To be honest he’s unfit and lazy. So I’ve purposefully tried to show him and his peers a clear example of when he’s not being lazy, the decisions around that and a positive outcome. It’s trying to get him to reflect on, well when I make the decision to work hard this is how successful I can be. This is about building confidence in decision-making. Coach 3
		Problem setting (16)	When we get to this stage of the session there is a, we’ve built up enough of a shared mental model that I can step back and set problems for them to use it most effectively. They now have the shared reference points to work from. Coach 2.
		Problem solving (14)	I’m really intrigued from where this launch has been born from in your mind before handing it over to the players? Yeah it’s a two phase pattern of play, I’ll be honest there is not much player led decision-making in these two phases of play. Yeah it’s been very successful as a play as we’ve scored loads of first phase tries this season off it and the lads have enjoyed it. I would never prescribe anything longer than two phases. Because after that, they need to make decisions, make errors, learn from that. Coach 1
		Questioning (39)	Oh no, the double question. I shouldn’t close my own question. The intentions there, but I didn’t even give him a chance did I. I asked quite an open question, then a really specific question immediately, I should have allowed for silence and given some time for them to consider an answer. I said, ‘what would you have changed?’ and then immediately said ‘where would you have stood differently?’ two massively different questions. Coach 3
		Silence (3)	One thing I’m learning is that I don’t want to be scared when there’s a silence, when I ask a question I need to be patient and they will eventually come to an answer. If they don’t just give them the time. Coach 1
	Player engagement (39)	Co-construction of tactics & strategy (11)	Make them take ownership and see what they come up with. It’s co-constructing the new launch rather than creating it myself. Coach 1
		Ownership (28)	The players themselves came up with the terms ‘stacked’ or ‘spread’ to identify what the defence were doing. Coach 2

[Numbers in brackets denote the number of times this theme was referenced during self-confrontation interviews].