One of the most frequent questions I am asked surrounding the coach-athlete/player relationship, is how close this relationship should be, or needs to be for it to be effective?
There are many layers to this answer, but the message is simple: To us the coach-athlete relationship is about healthy partnership, not dependency.
It’s like in Performance Therapy, or any other intervention we use as part of our coaching arsenal: we don’t want athletes dependent on the intervention, or the person who delivers it; however, if a certain athlete needs more maintenance than another person do you call that dependence? Or is that prudence?
Just as when we consider training theory and loading, to me it comes down to answering the question: “What is the minimum effective dose that allows the athlete to perform optimally?” That should be our barometer.
That is said with the following proviso: I would caution against building a coach-athlete relationship where you make yourself indispensable to the extent that the athlete is utterly helpless without you.
That is not good coaching, or a good relationship – that is dependence and it is unhealthy. Ultimately, like raising a child, our job is to prepare athletes for independence and autonomy.
Paradoxically – the longer you are in a coach-athlete relationship, the closer you may become as you get to know them better; but the less reliant the athlete should be on you to perform.
In some ways you will therefore become more distant from an emotional support perspective as a relationship evolves: experienced athletes should not have to depend on you to perform, or have to have you by their side - but they will, and should value your counsel before and after their performances if the relationship has been formed the right way.
|
