Supporting the professional sports coach in the workplace: presenting the pedagogue as the missing scientist

ABSTRACT

This is a positional paper in which we consider (re)imagining the role of the pedagogue as one who is specifically employed in a multi-disciplinary team of experts that can advise the professional sports coach. Our rationale is underpinned by multiple factors including the low impact of coach education, issues with knowledge translation, and current prevailing discourses in elite sport. Consequently, we employ ethnodrama as a “way in” to explore the precarious existence of elite coaches, cohering specifically around the profligate “hiring and firing” cultures found in professional football. This enables the inquiry to highlight how the pedagogue – the missing scientist – can utilise practical solutions on the ground responding to real-world problems. Going further, we consider how this role could also become a pivotal figure of resistance to the current value system inherent within elite sport reported to jeopardise athletes’ health and wellbeing. Thus, we respond to numerous challenges replete in elite sport organisations that are attracting increasing attention.

KEYWORDS:

• Pedagogue
• coach learning
• sport coaching
• coach education
• football
• pedagogy

Act 1: (Prologue I)

Caesar and Cleopatra (Act II) G. B. Shaw

CAESAR [turning to Theodotus]. And you, sir, are–?

THEODOTUS Theodotus, the King’s tutor.

CAESAR You teach men how to be kings, Theodotus.

That is very clever of you…

Introduction

This positional paper makes the case for the pedagogue to be included in a multi-disciplinary team of experts that advise the professional sports coach. Our intentions relate to a specialised pedagogical role – the missing scientist – that can support coaches as their own role becomes increasingly more sophisticated as they meet ever-changing needs. To begin with, the terms pedagogy and the pedagogue have become customary, broadly employed when referring to learning processes that bind coaching, teaching and knowledge(s). The origins of the pedagogue are depicted in the above epigraph where Theodotus had a crucial educational role in guiding the King. In more recent times, certain terminology academicised “pedagogy”, for example, as relating to different types of knowledge (Metzler, 2000), a subdiscipline of kinesiology (Tinning, 2002) or theory of psychology (Haag, 1989). This view promoted a conception of pedagogy as a science of teaching invoking narrow technical approaches to inform pedagogy (Crum, 1986). This scientific basis for pedagogy reduced the role of pedagogue to didactic teacher led pedagogy informed through achieving a range of variables that could be observed and measured. However, and despite adopting the moniker of “missing scientist”, our approach falls into line with more contemporary views articulating a field of “sport pedagogy” that is broadly organised into three subareas; coaches coaching, players learning and knowledge(s), and professional development (see Armour, 2011; Kirk & Haerens, 2014). In putting forward this case, we posit that teaching and learning are the ontological core of sport pedagogy and from this position we explore a range of complex issues in the elite sporting workplace. Our specific aim is underscored by the claim that elite sport coaches encounter complex educational issues that they are not adequately prepared for. We contest that the (sport) pedagogue can enhance the work of professional coaches through keeping up with developmental needs of athletes and ensuring teaching and learning processes are integrated with a functional coherence. Therefore, we present a (re)conceptualisation of the pedagogue (as the missing scientist) and ask this primary question: Should the pedagogue be a key figure in the ever-expanding sport scientific collective advising and supporting the professional sports coach?

In making our case, this inquiry coheres around an ethno-drama that represents plausible interactions and exchanges between key characters caught up in professional football. The lead character Colin Matthews is a fast-tracked football manager who has just been sacked despite having “all the badges”. During the 2022–2023 football season record sackings were reported in the top league of English professional football (Davis, 2023). Going back to 2019–2020 the average tenure of a professional football coach has been reported as 477 days with 75 mangers sacked in that season (Smith, 2020). This report also stated that by May the following season (2021–2022) another 51 mangers had been axed, and as we write 23 managers in the English leagues have already been sacked this season and we are yet to reach December. This catalogues a real-world and consequential workplace problem in professional sport that has grown year on year since after the Second World War. Firstly, through adopting this methodological approach, we start with challenging the assumption that appropriate coaching expertise and skills are developed in a “McDonaldised” coach education structure (see Bush & Williams, 2023).

The ethnodrama aims to provide a sense of authenticity in locating real-world coach learning issues. Consequently, with elite coaches living such a precarious existence, we echo concerns and clearly highlight the need to better support both the engagement and education of elite coaches (e.g. Morgan, Jones, Gilbourne, & Llewellyn, 2013; North, 2013). Currently, support is too fragmented and in the elite sport workplace coaching contexts are rarely structured with learning in mind (Rynne, Mallett, & Tinning, 2006). Thus, the value here not only disputes current restrictive conceptualisations about the pedagogue and what they could be, but we deploy real-life scenarios using ethnodrama to inform, contest and promote changes (Mienczakowski & Morgan, 2001). Therefore, in the first instance, we characterise the pedagogue as the learning expert in situ who becomes the “go to professional” to oversee greater alignment in the pursuit of learning. Whilst more broadly supporting performance aims working alongside other experts who influence all aspects of athletic development. Athletes can be limited by deficiencies of the coach and through addressing gaps in knowledge and joining dots the missing scientist can support a more praxis orientated pedagogy. In practice, being an instrumental figure in overseeing the translation of theoretical matter to bridge the “know-do” gap (i.e. Leggat, Wadey, Day, Winter, & Sanders, 2023), although in a way that responds directly to priorities and contextualised problems supporting the formation of “quality judgements” as a way forward to enable “more sophisticated work done in kinesiology and beyond” (Tinning, 2008, p. 419). In returning to the origins of the pedagogue in keeping with G.B. Shaw, the mobilisation of the pedagogue would ensure there is a definite educational nucleus at the very heart of what is proposed advocating more positive pedagogical processes in elite sport. One where support and guidance are central features, implementing pedagogical interventions to support coach learning and athletic performance but also extending the idea of “critical” pedagogical work (Tinning, 2022).

In this sense, the reference to critical acknowledges how the controlling yardstick of success has ensured personal and social development in elite sport has become rhetorical terms. The march of “professionalism” epitomises numerous challenges and significant issues replete in elite sport organisations that are attracting increasing attention. We note prominent and countless stories of bullying, abuse, sackings, misogyny, racism, victimisation and cultures of fear that frequently appear in well documented and countless media stories reported to jeopardise athletes’ health and wellbeing. Thus, we consider how the growth of vocational opportunities and multiple “scientific” roles; performance/data analysts, conditioning staff, nutritionists, psychologists, physiologists, service a “performance” agenda that is generating huge problems in elite sport. Unwittingly, identities are regulated and performed and these types of silo constructed operating systems are said to quell athlete development and impede performance outcomes (Springham, Walker, Strudwick, & Turner, 2018).

As well as very recent calls for a more “corresponsive” sport science (Woods, Araújo, & Davids, 2023), there are others who also recognise that high-performance coaching cultures pulsating around “science”, “performance” and “winning” have been problematic for some time (Cushion & Jones, 2014). As elite sport gradually wakes up to widespread issues at what point do we suggest the present composition of “experts” is inadequate? Therefore, we consider how the missing scientist could become a pivotal figure of resistance to the current value system inherent within elite sport. Of course, we fully recognise that this paper in terms of both its method and content will be contested, as such, we do not intend this paper to be prescriptive, but more of a directional purview that invites and expects critical dialogue and debate. Neither do we attempt validation through identifying theoretical gaps that constrain what counts as knowing and knowledge generation within the sports coaching field (Bush & Silk, 2010).

Method

Sport coaching scholars are mindful of the need to present their research in a variety of ways to engage both academic and practitioner audiences. Consequently, there is a need for these scholars – the “physical pedagogic bricoleurs” (Bush & Silk, 2010) – to break away from more traditional modes and forms of written communication. Importantly, we strongly believe in Smith and Sparkes (2009) assertion that avant-garde approaches should not be deployed simply because they are new or fashionable. Indeed, physical pedagogic bricoleurs should be encouraged to invoke new territories of expression, such as polyvocality, poetry, pastiche, art, photography, ethnography as drama, fiction and more, to challenge the scientific orthodoxy of the field and enable a wider dissemination of research findings to a range of audiences and readers (including applied practitioners), increasing the chances of having an impact, raising awareness and encouraging change (Bochner & Ellis, 2002; Bush, Silk, Andrews, & Lauder, 2013; McMahon, 2016).

This paper uses a subtype of qualitative inquiry, namely narrative-based inquiry, and is thus philosophically underpinned by ontological relativism and epistemological social constructionism (Papathomas, 2016). Narrative inquiry, and here we are borrowing from Chase (2015), is an approach which enabled us to attempt to understand others’ actions from the shaping and organising of events into a meaningful whole. Our research adopts a novel approach, drawing on multiple data sources from which we used ethnodrama to (re)present the data. We are mindful that the ethnodrama we present is our creative, subjective interpretation of the workplace environment of professional coaches and that this representation will be influenced by our own background and experiences. The lead author has a strong interest in professional team sports and has coached in professional environments. This author has also published work about the coaching workplace environment. The second author has over 25 years of coaching experience and publishes work which challenges taken-for-granted assumptions in the field. The second author has no experience in football and so this provided a neutrality to encourage reflexivity throughout the process. The third author is an academic who is a current player and coach in the context that the ethnodrama is set, which added depth to the ethnodrama by using personal reflection and perspectives of players and coaches drawn from their lived experiences.

Our inquiry involved drawing upon myriad empirical sources, specifically previous primary research activity undertaken by the lead author, augmented by our professional engagement and media representations on the topic. The lead author revisited 58 interview transcripts from professional team sport which had already received institutional ethical approval. The contexts of these interviews were work-life experiences in elite sport and coach knowledge, learning, development and practice. Participants in these studies included head coaches, assistant coaches, performance analysts, athletes and coach developers, amongst other stakeholders. Following familiarisation, the interview data were reduced by discarding all irrelevant information not related to workplace experiences of professional coaches, players and associated employees and the precarity of the job. Guided by the processes for qualitative data analysis articulated by Jones (2022), the lead author – reflexively and inductively through their own interpretation – followed the four stages of thematic analysis. In stage one, open coding, the lead author revisited the reduced data and sought out and noted identifiable categories (or themes) relating to the broad aims of the paper. In stage two, axial coding, the lead researcher re-interrogated the interview data to confirm the initial categorisation and supplement further the first-order themes that emerged from the open coding. In stage three, the lead researcher looked for relationships between the first-order themes to create second-order (or higher order) themes. Stage three resulted in the following higher-order themes: job precarity, coach education, technology and sustainability. Stage four, selective coding, the lead researcher drew together the higher-order themes into a single, core category that captured the essence of this research, namely, the difficulty encountered by professional coaches in a complex educational context. This core category and the higher order-themes were used to provide the scaffold the ethnodrama.

To develop the ethnodrama, an initial account was assembled by the lead author, informed by the interview data, our professional engagement and media representations. This provided the empirical base for the plot and characters in the story. The further evolution of the story involved representing the empirical base through specific scenarios that illustrated the workplace experiences of professional coaches, players and associated others. During this stage, the lead author was mindful to remain true to the parameters provided by the outcome of the thematic analysis whilst the script was being refined. Thus, the lead author operated from two standpoints, story analyst and then moving into the role of storyteller. Additionally, the co-authors encouraged the voices of all cast members were suitably heard and that the dialogue was as authentic and realistic as possible. Furthermore, several experienced coaches, from professional team sports, acted as critical friends (Smith & McGannon, 2018) and provided formative and summative feedback on the dialogue. Specifically, the critical friends feedback resulted in the addition of Act 1 to provide more of a backstory to the unfolding event, amendments to the dialogue between Colin and Sharon in Act 2 from their own experiences of dismissal and resultant interactions, and contextualising Act 3 within a professional coach development setting rather than an informal catch up as presented in an earlier iteration. Thus, the final representation was created through an iterative process which involved the drafting and redrafting of the ethnodrama into its final form.

Ethnodrama – communicating the results of material as a written play or theoretical script (Smith & Arthur, 2021) – enabled us to present a compelling and thought-provoking dramatisation of the case for the missing scientist (MS) from a multiplicity of divergent perspectives (e.g. the manager, the manager’s partner and other stakeholders) moving beyond more traditional realist forms of representation. As a mode of (re)presentation, ethnodrama is being embraced by physical pedagogic bricoleurs across the field (see Cassidy, Kidman, & Dudfield, 2015; Cavallerio, Wadey, & Wagstaff, 2016, 2022; Smith & Arthur, 2021) to unlock the engagement of non-academic audiences. In line with Smith and Arthur (2021), the scene was set to provide the contextual framing for the dramatisation using creative-non-fiction techniques in the “prologue” (i.e. the immediate aftermath of the managerial sacking) and in the “epilogue” (i.e. reflective conclusion). Then, as highlighted by Smith and Sparkes (2009), short scenes (the “Acts”) are presented as real-life encounters in a manner which is faithful to the lived experience.

It should be emphasised that expressing research in story form, writing thought-provoking texts where anything can happen, should not be confused with an environment in which anything goes (Amis & Silk, 2008). There remains an essential requirement to evaluate the quality of relativist non-foundational research to ensure “interpretive sufficiency” (Denzin, 2002) of the work and to hold it to “high and difficult standards” (Richardson, 2000, p. 254). Whilst many permutations of quality criteria could be invoked for this work, we decided that the criteria applied by Cavallerio, Wadey, and Wagstaff (2022) in representing their multi-perspective ethnodrama relating to parents’ experiences of overuse injuries in rhythmic gymnastics were an appropriate tool to adapt for this paper. Cavallerio, Wadey, and Wagstaff (2022) used Barone and Eisner’s (2012) criteria for judging arts-based research based on the assertion that “a good piece of arts-based research succeeds in enticing a reader or viewer into taking another look at dimensions of the social world that had come to be taken for granted” (Barone & Eisner, 2012, p. 145). From this assertion, the reader is asked to reflect on a series of questions (contextualised here to our paper) to assess the quality: is this ethnodrama incisive in the way it presents the potential of the MS in an elite sport setting? Does it portray the information in a concise way? Is it coherent, meaning that it portrays the story effectively? Does it challenge taken-for-granted assumptions and present realistic workplace solutions in supporting the elite coach? It is with these questions in mind, we invite the readers to engage with the following “case”.

The case: the “sacking” of Colin Matthews

To make the case for the MS in an elite sport context, we focused this study on the career of Colin Matthews, a fictional Premier League football manager created from a composite of many primary and secondary sources. The empirical sources underpinning this paper cover in depth many of the challenges and frustrations associated with elite managers (coaches) having the sole responsibility for the on-field performances of their players (athletes) and team. It is these challenges and frustrations that are captured in the ethnodrama.

The cast

Colin Matthews

Colin was ex-International and Premier League footballer widely regarded as one of the finest players of his generation. He was fast tracked through the coaching badges and holds the UEFA Pro Licence, the highest award possible in the professional game. After retiring, he immediately took on the role of Tabernacle United Premier League manager. Colin was a very “hands-on” manager and done much of the coaching himself. He was manager at the club for nearly 10 months and the club endured a run of poor recent form losing seven out of the last eight games. The team recently entered the relegation zone. Colin has just received the news that he will no longer be the manager of Tabernacle United, and his contract has been terminated.

Sharon Matthews

Sharon is Colin’s wife of 12 years and is a project manager for an International Charity.

Paul Meredith

Paul is a current professional player at Tabernacle United, he is an international player with 58 caps and captained the team under Colin’s tenure. Paul, thinking ahead to future career options, has just got involved in some academy coaching at Tabernacle and is currently being “fast-tracked”.

Results

Act 1: (Prologue II) “Behind Closed Doors”

The waiting room is painted white. A solitary clock sits in Colin’s peripheral; every chime intensifying with each passing second. The walls drawing nearer with every ring. 7:48pm, Twenty-seven seconds passing within the minute. At the centre of the room sits a coffee table, scattered with an array of magazines and newspapers. Some ripped. Some missing their front cover. Colin’s dishevelled appearance laced across the back pages a stark reminder of Tabernacle’s plight. To the far left of the room sits its only window. The inclement weather outside as grotty as the windowpane within. Colin’s thoughts race back to his first game in early October. The conditions outside not too dissimilar. A standout performance. The players first to every second ball; on the front foot. Assertive … but five months had passed since then.

Colin glances at the clock once more. 7:57, exactly.

Colin’s attention is drawn to the double doors. “Skipper” Paul nonchalantly enters the building. Their eyes momentarily meet before their heads scurry in unison, looking for welcome distractions. Colin’s gnawed fingernails further expose the situation’s magnitude. Another presence appears in the doorway adjacent. His features as sharp as the sherbet lemon pirouetting around Colin’s mouth, choreographing his thoughts to this season’s mistakes.

“We’ll see you now, if you’re ready, Col?”.

Act 1: (Prologue III) ”Where Dreams Come True”

The boot of a red Mercedes-Benz E-Class slams shut. It’s Monday, 8.17PM. Life changing moments Colin Matthews will never forget. This was his first management post, and he has just been sacked. Just three days after receiving an enthusiastic vote of confidence when the club were “100 per cent” behind him. The opening gambit as he sat down in the boardroom: “Firstly, we as a board would like to thank you immensely for all your hard …” reverberated around his consciousness. Anything thereafter was blur. And he certainly didn’t have a say in the matter. His time was up. Leaving the shiny new building, one that betrays the internal combustion, he quietly says his goodbye. Earlier in the day during training he was upbeat, thinking “they have had so many bollocking’s they must get it by now”! This was the time for the board to back him. Colin, you’re our man and out comes the cheque book. Now he sits, straining, tensed, feeling sick … the infotainment system wakes, and George Ezra appears uninvited blasting out “Blame it on me”. Without further hesitation, the engine turns over and the Mercedes races across the car park and through the exit gates, adorned by the immortal words “Tabernacle United: Where Dreams Come True”. The car whizzes down the avenue as Colin ponders (angrily), like fuck do they …

Act 2: arriving back home (some 20 minutes later)

The front door slams hard. Sharon immediately senses something wrong. She is only too aware of the issue quickly reflecting on myriad media stories and the mass speculation that comes with elite football management. Colin walks straight through into the oversized kitchen living space and immediately blurting the news out instantaneously as their eyes meet:

Colin:

They done it, fucking sacked me.

Sharon:

(aware this moment had been coming, hence the pre-meditated quick response) Really, that’s so unfair. No-one has worked as hard as you at that club. You have done an incredible job and led from the front (meanwhile she pours what’s left of the recently opened French red into an oversized wine glass)

Colin:

(Reaching for the drink) I really gave it my all, I just needed more time …. But now (voice crackles) I’m just a statistic I guess, joining the other countless football managers who have already been sacked this season (he grimaces as the reality of his predicament sets in, then takes a large gulp of the red).

Sharon:

(staying calm) I know it’s a tough one to take Colin, but you should be confident you will get a new position soon if that’s your wish? You’ve got everything to be a successful football manager. Forget Tabernacle, you will have a big future in the game as a manager, they have lost a legend.

Colin:

(Pausing whilst he takes another large gulp) I am not so sure; I will be tainted by what will be viewed externally as abject failure, me Colin Matthews, their big ex player, and the dream return. The fact is we didn’t achieve our …

Sharon:

(Interrupting, voice raised) People have seen so much potential in you Colin. You were a great player; you have all that knowledge and were “fast-tracked” because of your pedigree. You went straight to the Premiership as a manager. Like you say, they needed to give you more time.

Colin:

(dejectedly) For sure, on paper I’m great, but it all counted for nothing in the end. I must be honest here, I just felt out of my depth in the end, pieces of paper don’t prepare you for that role. I mean, what a week eh? Just yesterday I got a call from the doctor, Giteria (club record striker), now has an unseen heart condition, nobodies known about this, where were the fucking medics on this one? It’s a thunderbolt, he’s a major player for us, and he wasn’t available for that must win game last Saturday (Tabernacle lost). Marco had his car stolen Friday and he couldn’t get to training before that game either. Jimmy is on an assault charge, the analysis guy he’s off sick, the physio has walked out, there’s just dramas, little dramas all the time (takes another large gulp then continues). It builds, and builds, eleven other players out injured, and that’s my world it’s so stressful and the players they only look at themselves, they are really selfish. Like, I went in every morning at 6 am and I tried to be fine, kept my chest held high tried to ignore the speculation, the sleepless nights, but there were so many unanswered questions. I just feel like a needed some support in there you know … some guidance. In the end I just ended up bollocking them, controlling everything I could, the way they trained, what they did constantly, I blamed them … and I didn’t want to listen to anyone, it was all too chaotic and I didn’t have any time to think through stuff.

Sharon:

Well, did you get the necessary support for all those issues at the club? I mean, who is supposed to be supporting you with all this? Its sounds to me like you have had to do everything Colin.

Colin:

I was doing everything alright. I just lost my way though Sharon. Yes, I have the highest coaching qualifications, but those coaching awards are crap and in no way prepare you for the chaos of what I’m talking about here. This is real, not some bullshit stuff in a shiny classroom with a load of nodding dogs. I mean, you only need to look at the greats; Paisley, Shankley, Clough, Busby, they didn’t have a piece of paper between the lot of em’. They wouldn’t even get a job today! (He sarcastically chuckles to himself and takes another gulp of wine)

Sharon:

The club has failed you Colin and not the other way around, you needed more support around you (not giving up on this line).

Colin:

(Taking a deep breath) Well, maybe … but I had every ‘ologist in place y’know. Analysist, nutritionist, physio, S and C, psychologist and more, the whole shebang. And Barry (the Technical Director of Football), then Jonno, the Head of Athletic development … they were all there with all their specialisms but who was supporting me?

Sharon:

(Interjecting, fuming) What about Barry, I bet he’s still there?

Colin:

Of course, he’s long term and strategic stuff, wise enough not to get caught up in the everyday grind. The losing, the issues, the injuries, I just saw him when it was all going positive, and when the cameras came out.

Sharon:

The board should have allowed you to continue. You would have turned it around Colin. It’s not your fault …

Colin:

(Flustered and blunt) Not for everything Sharon, the buck stops with me. Were the players happy, I know we were losing en all, but they looked miserable and fed up. I lost them. Nothing I was saying or doing was getting through. There’s so much I am trying to get my head around, but I took it out on them, I was angry and just spent my time berating them, telling them they were soft and not tough enough (Sharon says nothing just leaves words float around the room before Colin continues) Well here we are but three days ago they said everything is rosy, everything fine, unanimous support from the board blah blah now gone, history. From last year’s record winning season to freefall and a big slump; what’s changed? Some of my ex-colleagues in management, they all say the same stuff, we are all so side-tracked juggling a million and one things, and there is only one sure-fire outcome, we are all getting sacked!

(Colin, grimacing, looking directly through the skylight and up to the stars pondering … what’s next?)

Act 3: the National Coaching Conference

(Some 3 weeks later Colin attends the National Coaches Conference to ensure he is “competent” for another 3 years. Whilst there he surprisingly bumps into Paul Meredith).

Colin moves out of the main hall after sitting through another presentation filled with “Football Jargon” and into lounge area. Then across the room his eyes lock on to Paul Meredith’s. The moment is held, uncomfortable, but brief. They walk towards each other and shake hands; the ice is broken.

Colin:

(with a sense of awkwardness) Good to see you Paul, feels like a while (maintains eye contact while he maintains a firm grip).

Paul:

How’s it been Gaffer? (Without giving Colin the chance to respond) Tough I guess, can’t have been easy?

Colin:

(Surprised, but not disappointed he has retained the term “Gaffer”) I’m devastated to be honest Paul, didn’t really see it coming, I love the club, it means the world to me. And even though the results were going against us I thought they would have held out and given me more time to turn it around.

Paul:

(Breaking the tension) What about this conference?

Colin:

(sighs). It’s just “peacocking” really isn’t it, look at them four over there, full club tracksuits on, “look at us”. There are some good people around for sure, but it’s all about status, isn’t it? I mean, I just got sacked. Is this day going to make me more competent. (There’s contempt in Colin’s face, but he doesn’t want to talk about the conference, he wants to talk about the sacking. What did Paul think about it?) Can I ask you though Paul, what did you think about it, the players an’ that? (Colin didn’t need to mention the “sacking” word)

Paul:

(Feeling he needs to be honest; he respects Colin): The players have just got on with it. There’s no time to sit around thinking, it’s the pace of everything today. We are all aware the owners only care about winning and we (players) get paid well but we all got our price … so it is what it is really, you just move on, and try not to rock the boat.

Colin:

(reciprocating with honesty) Well, as you can imagine, I have had lots of time to think. I’m glad we crossed paths today as I really wanted you to know that I wanted the best for you and the players. There was just so much going on, day in day out, I just get lost in the system. I came up short …

Paul:

But the boys respected you massively Gaffer … and we deserved the blame, the way we played, we let you down.

Colin:

(Interrupting, he’s been waiting for this moment …) Looking back the boys must have sensed that I was struggling Paul? Being honest, I just felt out of my depth. Were my methods and approach to everything effective? Especially when it turned sour, looking back I could have done things differently. I have got such a desire to learn and get better Paul. With Jonno (Head of Athletic Development), he used to put on loads of CPD for the coaches, with external speakers and stuff, but for me, I struggled to see how it fitted in to what we were doing, it just wasn’t applicable. It’s just all so standardised, and off the record, some of the coaches they didn’t see the importance of learning, they don’t see there are gaps in their knowledge, they think that playing has given them all the learning they need.

Paul:

But what about our winning run last season though’? We beat just about everyone! (The memory brings a warm expression to his face)

Colin:

Ah, things just fell into place then, I thought it was going to be that easy, all the time, who was I kidding? For sure, when I came in it was a lift for everyone but overtime that wasn’t sustainable without doing everything better, every day.

Paul:

(now feeling regretful too): As skipper perhaps, I should have done more as well. Speaking with the players when you left, there was a consensus that things could have been done differently.

Colin:

(interested) In what way?

Paul:

(Sigh’s, not sure where this is leading) Stuff we were doing in training, involving the players more maybe, keeping it positive, they (players) were scared sometimes of letting you down, they didn’t express themselves well. It got bad when we were losing, it just added more pressure, it all got over complicated, we were confused, it never clicked, and we were really struggling. And you were pretty vocal in the media about some players and that really hit em’ hard too Gaffer.

Colin:

(With a chastening expression) Thanks Paul, I appreciate that, I didn’t always control my emotions too well, did I? Yep, for sure, it falls on me to create a better learning environment, to really analyse what we were trying to achieve and the how. Yeah, the alignment of our methods, our staff, and transfer to performances. How the players take everything on we are trying to achieve … but for me, at times I just felt like I needed some guidance, support, well real support, and I don’t want to blame anyone here … but someone to have conversations with away from the circus, honest dialogue about all the stuff going on. I know what you’re thinking Paul, “But that’s your job” (Colin reads the expression on Paul’s face), and I kept thinking and muttering that to myself -that’s your job Col. Yes, it is my job, isn’t it? I’m the big dog, get paid the big bucks and the big ex-player and all that … I also realise I need to be better at developing my players, better at developing team culture, better at so many other things. When I went into Tabernacle Paul, I was so naive. I thought, I am 80% of the way to becoming a top manager, great player, all the badges but it was more like 20%. We can’t just keep on blaming the media and the hype for mass sackings. What are we doing, I and we have to own some of it. Any way how are you (hoping Paul doesn’t mention the clubs recent upturn in fortunes)?

Paul:

(also trying to navigate the conversation away from 3 recent victories) I have started doing some coaching, in the academy and that’s why I’m here, getting my badges. It’s been an eye opener (he chuckles) and all I see is loads of academy kids running around with GPS on with no idea on how to play football! Anyway, I’m in there now and I will be beasting them into shape!

Colin:

(Shifting the conversation back to Tabernacle and ready for a lighter moment) I remember we played the Spartans (Premier League Team) and in the 71st minute its 2 all right (Paul nods, he remembers the game, his mistake let in the equaliser). And Darren (the physio) comes over to me and says “Gaffer, Big John (midfield) has only got 3 minutes left. I’m like what?” He is running the game. Anyway, he comes off and we lose 3–2. I’m thinking, what’s happening to my gut instinct here? I’m all for science but whose accountable here … to be honest I don’t understand it and I haven’t got time to figure it out. I needed someone around to package all that for me (looking around) I don’t want to be like most of these, being able to talk the talk but never deliver. Talking about not delivering, I hear “Cherry” is on his way out. Can’t see him here today either?

Paul:

Yeah, from what I can gather from some players there, there is loads of stuff going on. Abuse, bullying, you name it, the players are not enjoying …

(Before Colin can respond the call goes out everyone is expected back in the main hall for the next presentation analysing Pep’s (Guardiola [current Man City Manager]) cutting edge innovation).

Epilogue (the radio announcement)

Returning home that evening Colin walks through into the kitchen area and makes a request to Alexa to turn on SportsDesk UK (Pseudonym Radio Station) to get the six-o clock sports bulletin.

Good evening, and welcome to SportsDesk. I’m Alex Roberts and this is your evening update. We start the show with exclusive news that Dave Cherry, the ex-England Captain, has today been relieved of his duties at Vale FC. This follows a recent run of poor form just 8 months after a much-heralded appointment by the board and fans alike, he departs. SportsDesk understand talks are well underway with a potential replacement. Club Chairman, Owen Mathews wished Cherry the best for the future and(Colin allows himself a wry smile and instructs Alexa to “off” mode)

Discussion

Rethinking education v certification to support elite coaches in the workplace

The low impact of formal coach development has been consistently reported through scholarly work (e.g. Cope, Cushion, Harvey, & Partington, 2021; Nelson, Cushion, & Potrac, 2013). Others have pointed out how neoliberal influences in a professional football context account for inferior levels of coach “education” (Bush & Williams, 2023). Yet, to manage at the very top of a domestic system in football in the United Kingdom (UK) you must, like Colin, hold a UEFA Pro Licence. As Colin acknowledged, even if coaches don’t perceive the pursuit of learning to be of value, they will actively seek acceptance in this “controlled society” through achieving markers of accreditation that lead to professional opportunities (Piggott, 2015). Colin himself demonstrated a greater appetite for learning through later reflection, but it was his stature in the game as an ex-footballer that fulfilled perceptions that previous athletic ability is most salient. A perspective supported when considering appointments for high-performance coaching roles (e.g. Blackett, Evans, & Piggott, 2021; Trudel, Paquette, & Lewis, 2021). Where ex-professional players being even more favoured if they were, as Colin, part of a successful team (Rynne, 2014).

In this regard, this unyielding perception creates a narrow and indoctrinated coaching population who access professional coaching roles in football whilst completing the highest coaching qualifications. However, when exploring the extensive sacking crises in professional football, it is clear that “badges” do not adequately prepare new coaches for the complex and multifarious roles they occupy. Colin viewed himself as the “big dog”, the one who was paid the “big bucks”, with the ethnodrama illustrating how he conformed to these specific ways of being (Denison, Mills, & Konoval, 2017). The berating, the blaming, accusing the players of being “soft”, generally overseeing a blame culture and being vocal in the media about poorly performing players. In many ways, Colin was conformed to presenting himself as an elite coach whose behaviours mirrored a particular view of cultural reality (Cushion & Jones, 2014). Consequently, the very idea that “having all the badges” is a key ingredient for coaching success has become an irrational and intricate can of worms.

In that workplace, Colin struggled to consider alternative educational strategies when problems developed, and we start to consider what could be achieved away from a system of education that is clearly failing elite football coaches. Reaffirming the central purpose of “pedagogy” here as a learning and educational process grounded in the workplace to make elite coach jobs easier. Colin required significant support and being a recipient of the highest coaching award held little residual educational value in the workplace. To him, engaging with the continuing “coach education” façade was about “peacocking” and “status” and we need to (re)frame rather than reaffirm the problem. We assert that a shift in emphasis needs to ensure the development of relevant and authentic knowledge is best situated in the workplace itself. Such approaches have larger impact and are reported through exploring numerous domains of work (Billett, 2004).

In our context, the missing scientist could have worked more closely with Colin (and other coaches) to acquire, implement and reflect on desired pedagogical knowledge(s) where it was most needed to drive effective change on the ground (Avner, Markula, & Denison, 2017). An approach similar to perspectives that strongly endorse the coaching workplace as a legitimate site for their learning (e.g. Mallett, Rynne, & Billett, 2016; Rynne, Mallett, & Tinning, 2010). Due to the inadequacies of coach education coupled with a set of limited coaching experiences, Colin’s route descended into a desperate pedagogical situation where he was “out of his depth”. Congruent with perspectives where early career coaches should serve a rite of passage because and you must learn the “hard way” (Potrac, Jones, Gilbourne, & Nelson, 2012; Thompson, Potrac, & Jones, 2015). Yet, despite long hours and the brave face, the real necessity was to make more educated and strategic decisions rather than continually blame the players. Paul noted the debilitating effects of Colin’s uncooperative behaviours on the players in that they were “scared”, pressurised’ and because it “hit em” hard’. They were profoundly attached to this social context, and this manifested in poor performance outcomes. Here, we are reminded, that despite someone like Colin experiencing a rich playing career, that just accumulating learning is not adequate to facilitate meaningful learning (Mallett & Lynch, 2006). As Colin’s fate plummeted, he was a new coaching professional who was requiring even more support when his team was going through a series of losses that ultimately cost him his job.

Our intentions for the missing scientist are supported elsewhere through recognition that sources of close guidance and not only required but essential for early career elite coaches caught up in challenging workplace situations (Mallett, Rynne, & Billett, 2016). Colin’s actions, in that he “didn’t want to listen to anyone”, are consistent with reports that address this reluctancy during times of threat and insecurity for coaches (Rynne, Mallett, & Tinning, 2010). This creates a wide range of empirical and practical problems for coach learning and any support would be contingent on providing both affordances and agency. For example, any interdependence between Colin and the social world would account for how he would consider the coach-pedagogue relationship supporting him. In this sense, coaches can act as they decide, but they need to appreciate how they are influenced by the impact of structure in their workplace. Coaches would require agency that allows them to demonstrate the richness of what they know and how they have come to know it and why that is.

We posit that the missing scientist could have expedited some of the issues in the story. Mainly through helping Colin to better understand the particularities of how they have been shaped, their coaching methods, knowledge deficits, behaviours, decision-making and the pervasive nature of discourse. Thus, ensuring a more fluid and collaborative venture is produced to structure pedagogical research practices that ensure that coaches and players possess desired pedagogical knowledge to better support the outcomes they want (Armour, 2013; Lusted, 1986). Although in practice, the pedagogue as enabler needs to fully appreciate that interactions between themselves and the coach views learning as an interactive process. Knowledge construction and this process won’t be entirely research based, for example, it’s not just about “theoretically” re-modelling practice (Billett, 2004), or obsessing over “evidence based” research that needs to satisfy a corporatised academic context (Bush & Silk, 2010). Otherwise, and as demonstrated with other forms of education, discourse as the dominant relay would only ensure learners and their learning are “not existentially in the same maze” (Moore, 2013, p. 71). Hence, we now specifically consider how the missing scientist could enable a more applicable and contextual theoretical research motor.

The missing scientist in action

We consider how the pedagogue could oversee research processes that provide more responsive and contextualised coaching solutions. First, we consider how reported dislocation between research and practice could be more effectively harmonised through this pedagogic role. An enormous corpus of research exists in regard to many of the pedagogical issues promoted in the ethnodrama, e.g. coaching “methods”, practice design, human relationships, learning environments and the acceleration of data driven coaching. These examples provide a cursory window into multiple scholarly knowledge domains that can better support coaches such as Colin whose pedagogical deficiencies suppressed athlete learning. We propose that the missing scientist can ensure relevant knowledge is generated in situ to address specific and contextualised problems and priorities as they emerge. Promoting a form of “knowledge translation” that breaks away from ineffective “top down” and prescriptive academic methods recognised to stifle impact (Bowen & Graham, 2013). Through overseeing cycles of planned action leading an active alliance (e.g. pedagogue, coaches, players, sport science support) that could focus on the localised “problem”, the shaping of research questions, decisions over the methods and the implementation of results that are tailored to this context. Moreover, when surveying other professional fields, examples of more integrated knowledge transfer (iKT) are most effective when knowledge creation and action are grounded (Graham & Tetroe, 2007). The significant advantage for the pedagogue (and coach/athletes) working this way is that they are always in situ and fully understanding the context of practice settings, performance objectives and wider structural issues (Leggat, Wadey, Day, Winter, & Sanders, 2023). In effect, saying farewell to fragmented and ineffective silo’s and instead working to empower all relevant parties to bridge the know-do gap whilst providing a greater rationale for coaching behaviours and practice. As Colin grumbled, who was supporting me?

As conveyed in the story, the use of external speakers and “loads” of Continual Professional Development (CPD) provided a range of “coach learning” resources at Tabernacle FC. However, coaches didn’t see the relevance because it never “fitted in to what we are doing” and Colin became increasingly despondent as he teetered at the “edge of chaos” dealing with all the “thunderbolts” (Bowes & Jones, 2006). We also acknowledge through the script that coaches do not always possess the desire to learn neither do they recognise they are on a journey and are only “20%” of the way. The discursive production of coaching behaviours can only take you so far and coaches require intervention that provides them with a greater self-awareness of their actions and their performing “selves” (Partington & Cushion, 2013).

Hence, we now extend our analysis in relation to Paul who is starting to do some regular academy coaching. Many have challenged the mythopoeic status of academies when the amount of time and money is considered. Calvin (2017) reports that 1% of all boys who enter at the age of 9 will make a living from the game. Conn (2017) goes further, revealing that even five from six gaining elite scholarships at sixteen are not playing professional football at twenty-one (Conn, 2017). While other reports are similarly bleak, suggesting only 180 of 1.5 million boys playing organised youth football in England will play a single minute in the Premier League (B.B.C. Sport, 2021). Further, we understate the colossus financial investment expended with a disclosed £1.94 billion investment youth football development being made thus far (Premier League, 2022). The story depicts how Paul’s coaching journey is also underway in the academy setting, and again, he will be someone who will follow an employment route that advantages former players due to an assumption they can “govern” accordingly (Blackett, Evans, & Piggott, 2019). Coaches beget coaches, and ideas of “beasting” players into shape fall into line with reports of cultures of fear that perpetuate where such disciplinary mechanisms are deployed to silence in an elite football academy (Manley, Roderick, & Parker, 2016). We agree with calls acknowledging a clear need for theory and practice to collaborate more effectively to support player development in academy settings (Raya-Castellano & Uriondo, 2015). An increasingly and more concerning thread of criticism relates to huge volumes of players being released from the professional game every year with many experiencing distress, depression, loss of self-worth and suicidal ideation (Blakelock, Chen, & Prescott, 2016; Douglas & Carless, 2014). Whilst such an array of evidence fundamentally questions the ethical parameters and purposes of academies, with significant endeavours still resulting in a range of relatively poor outcomes, there is a considerable need to break this cycle.

These interrelated matters are certainly a sizeable concern, and the missing scientist can support coaches (and stakeholders) to construct a critical vision of methods and actions to address such real-world workforce problems. Of course, it could be argued whether it is possible to educate someone in the art of coaching. Some may feel that it mainly consists of natural ability with a feel to do and say the right things at the given time. However, passing tests and achieving accreditation is no guarantee of someone imparting coaching knowledge effectively. In sketching out this role, we agree with others that it is possible to better learn any vocational craft through being fully supported in the workplace as work as demonstrated by empirical workplace learning research (Billett, 2004). Continuous collaboration for coaches alongside an educational expert would enable more progressive forms of pedagogy through examining pedagogical practice to facilitate curricula moving forward. Rather, as Billett (2004) discussed, the onset of more intelligent steps is a consequence of thinking and acting in the actual coach learning workplace. Although attempts to close the know-do gap need to appreciate that it’s about a convergence of pedagogies – practices, justification of those practices, and the understanding of spaces which frame and sustain more effective workplace practices. However, not by simply adopting a standalone methodology (e.g. Otte, Rothwell, Woods, & Davids, 2020), but resisting a product view of knowledge and learning where Colin was a key member of a social-cultural community (Lave & Wenger, 1991). With a clear realisation that pedagogy, coach learning and acts of coaching are best captured through appreciating a dialectical relationship between the coach, learners, the social and broader context of their work (Watts & Cushion, 2017).

For Colin, he had “every ologist” at his disposal’, but ultimately, he endured a recurring pattern. Education in the elite sport domain is not like school, and there are not always obvious formal processes. In pursuing new frontiers, the “pedagogue”, as “handyperson”, could deploy myriad research methodologies signifying a very considered and broad ontological leap away from commonly applied carefully controlled research variables often labelled as the “gold standard” or merely instrumentalise knowledge (Bush & Silk, 2010; Denzin, 2012). Navigating beyond a deeply entrenched “hypothetico-deductive” theory of scientific process but one that is fundamentally limited (Woods, Araújo, & Davids, 2023). Certainly, in the way, assumptions about knowledge(s) can be implied and practiced in unapologetically top-heavy elite sport systems where theory-practice chasms abound and silo-based functionality persists, i.e. not being truly multi-disciplinary, and overall, a sheer lack of accountability is provided. Introducing the missing scientist presents a clear shift away from ways in which academics have sought to theorise their work for practitioners from afar. We don’t compare like for like here in this inquiry but there are already some examples filtering through of similar type roles in professional sport operating in situ, e.g. the use of a “learning advisor” (Rugby Australia, 2023). For our pedagogue, we acknowledge that the formulation of such a role would involve a shift beyond dominant empirical analytic research to re-create a bricoleur capable of making sense of a methodological arsenal that uses multiple tools and forms of representation (Bush, Silk, Andrews, & Lauder, 2013; Leggat, Wadey, Day, Winter, & Sanders, 2023).

Supporting more sustainable high-performance cultures

Currently, there are well-founded calls for a more sustainable elite sport model. Specifically, to realise a version of elite sport created as not only defined by performance and results but to “think about sport in ways to emphasize community and people rather than efficiency and performance” (Barker, Barker-Ruchti, Wals, & Tinning, 2014, p. 5). Going further, we consider how this role could become a pivotal figure of resistance to the current value system inherent in elite sport. To do so, we now consider a range of very current and challenging issues replete in elite sport. In doing so, and within the remit of what is proposed, we accept that economic and structural conditions have also had a “deep influence” shaping what are criticised as destructive cultures in elite sport (Feddersen, Morris, Abrahamsen, Littlewood, & Richardson, 2021). The recent Whyte Review (2022) is cognisant of this, being explicit about athlete welfare, abuse and mistreatment over an extended period. The impact of how elite sporting cultures pertain to darker experiences that result in a range of underlying issues and prevalence is understood; from eating disorders (Papathomas, Petrie, & Plateau, 2018), to burnout (Nixdorf, Beckmann, & Nixdorf, 2020), depression (Newman, Howells, & Fletcher, 2016), substance abuse (Seear & Fraser, 2010), concussion (McMillan et al., 2016) and increased mental health symptoms (Reardon et al., 2019).

We are not suggesting that the implications storied here are as serious or abusive as some of the aforementioned above, but as Colin persevered with “bollocking” players that had repercussions for team performance. Colin also demonstrated a lack of awareness about player welfare, pathologizing the players as being “soft” and lacking “mental toughness” (Denison, 2007). For Colin, benevolence and wellbeing appear to have been trumped by the all-out quest for success and winning. Feeling isolated, his vulnerability was overshadowed by him succeeding on his own. Thus, drawing similarities with ritualistic accounts of playing “hero” when coaching in football (e.g. Potrac, Jones, Gilbourne, & Nelson, 2012). Yet the players also played their part in this maelstrom. This was further illuminated through Paul’s comments where he felt the players “deserved the blame” for losing and offered no resistance, in effect imitating the “good athlete” (e.g. Tsang, 2000). Paul, reciprocating further, accepted the economic ideals of the situation admitting that we all “all got out price”. Speaking to the way athletes can view themselves as mere objects for economic advantage in markets fuelled by uncertainty and the need for financial gain (Barker-Ruchti, 2019).

The value systems inherent in elite sport and a caring coaching approach remain poles apart, and as such, athletes’ health and well-being will continue to be jeopardised (Dohsten, Barker-Ruchti, & Lindgren, 2020). We also note how the intensification of technology in elite sport is fuelling this incompatibility problem. This continuous cycle of high performance and constant improvement involving ever more extreme forms of training and technology sets off unceasing alarm bells (Loland, 2006). Indeed, serious concerns about extreme surveillant cultures in elite sport are well documented where the “always on” proposition is ubiquitous in players’ lives (Manley & Williams, 2022; Middlemas & Harwood, 2018; Taylor, Potrac, Nelson, Jones, & Groom, 2017). Elite sport workplaces are sites of struggle, a regression of agency and freedom for elite athletes is heavily restricted. The way in which technological processes override educational ones is made by Colin who makes this very point when commenting on GPS and player markers in conversation with Paul at the National Coaching Conference. Where coaches can be at the behest of the epistemological orientation of science and numbers that trumps all other knowledge(s) and their “gut” feeling. There is a danger that the craft of coaching is being stifled as elite sport becoming increasingly colonised by technology (and Artificial Intelligence) leading to wisdom constraining realities. Environments that are so heavily trusting on vertical and extractive methods of data and knowledge production have created “machine mentalities” that shaped a culture of compliance as players become “robotic” as they yielded to the omnipresent (Williams & Manley, 2016). The missing scientist can again question dominant pedagogic practices, certainly in reference to the considerable use of technology in elite sport where such a blind acceptance can lead to “technological somnambulism” (Winner, 2018, p. 51).

Finally, the statecraft of the pedagogue can illustrate existential ideas that people are what they do, getting coaches to think more critically about the work they do. Not as enforcer but occupying an ontological position influencing a critical pedagogy. We cannot just rely on flag waving and leave coaches under their own supervision in the proviso they are “athlete centred”. Rather, this only provides a convenient illusion of athlete empowerment, and its coaches acting as the “agents of normalisation”, who now require even greater levels of support (Konoval, Denison, & Mills, 2021). The current professional sports model is unsustainable, and there is a need for greater resistance and not another “scientific” dispotif. Optimistically, we feel we have not yet reached a stage where thinking outside this prevailing discourse is routinely dismissed restricting practitioners from embracing new ways of being (Cushion, Stodter, & Clarke, 2022; Denison, Mills, & Konoval, 2017). We appreciate that for the pedagogue to influence greater levels of sports integrity will have huge challenges. Particularly as abusive practices are further reproduced and reported (McMahon, Zehntner, McGannon, & Lang, 2020. Admittedly, we then concede it would be idealistic and unfeasible for the missing scientist to suddenly resolve all matters of concern. Back in 1988 Giroux gave voice to pedagogic struggles for democracy and social justice and we return to the notion of extending “critical” pedagogical work. Firmly accepting that core principles of critical pedagogy have never been at the forefront of elite sporting ambitions. But as Tinning (2022) argues, we have now reached a time where coaches would need to be open to consider matters of social justice, power differentials and abuse. In effect, they need to see anew. Moreover, the centrality of our proposal is timely, facilitated by societal changes in the way “sport is viewed more broadly, as a vehicle for social change, a fundamental human right and a tool for social as well as personal development” (Grioux, 1988; Norman, 2018, p. 192).

Coda …

This positional paper responds to multiple “real world” issues as portrayed in the ethnodrama. Recognising elite sport as a continuous site of flux and instability bringing increasing challenges for professional coaches who are currently being failed by the coach education system. From here, our inquiry presents the pedagogue as something different and more than just a didactic teacher. For coaches, like Colin and Paul transitioning into professional roles, providing them with relevant support and tools to feel more “secure” in new coaching identities (Blackett, Evans, & Piggott, 2019). Through expanding the inquiry, we examine how the uncomfortable pairing of success and well-being speaks closely to those epistemological issues and core purposes of sport. Continually directed by the necessity to disengage themselves from tacit assumptions of discursive practice and power relations to govern a more conscious control over pedagogic actions (Kincheloe, 2009). Through conducting research in situ, this would improve the contextual knowledge base helping to both challenge dominant pedagogic practices and bridge the “know-do” gap. In high-performance workplace environments elite coaches can be overrun daily and too busy to “really look outside” what they are doing (Rynne, Mallett, & Tinning, 2010). Thereby, and through this story, we start to characterise a (re)imagined pedagogue, the missing scientist. As an expert who through taking their place in the sport science collective can initiate an intellectual and practical evolution. Finally, since the pressures of elite sport are ubiquitous, we are not holding coaches wholly accountable here, we know they can become overwhelmed, where leadership and control issues cause longstanding values and beliefs to be espoused. However, through defining sustainability as a continuous process of democratic negotiation, the missing scientist can support coaches to guard against unsustainable consequences. Most pertinent in the elite sport domain where the manifestation of poor moral reasoning is promoted through the co-existence of artificial rules and the need to win fostering expressions of “bracketed morality” (Bredemeier & Shields, 1984). Elite sport continues to be transformed economically and culturally. The missing scientist can apply empowerment interventions in the coaching process going forward, otherwise what is produced and re-produced for athletes to excel will remain uncritically unchallenged (Cushion, Stodter, & Clarke, 2022). Thus, in a throwback to the origins of the role, as the expert who can walk alongside elite coaches to make their job easier with a great need for sustainable educational practice on the ground. The missing scientist is hereby proposed as having the potential to bring a significant sphere of influence to elite sport environments.

Therefore, we invite comments and discussion.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).