This Saturday sees one of the most famed schoolboy derbies in the country take place in the country town of Paarl. Last year I made my first trip to the Faure Street stadium to take it all in and was absolutely blown away by the occasion. The match itself being the climax of an entire week’s worth of celebrations. Special assemblies, old boys’ gatherings and numerous other rituals add to a week of camaraderie, emotion and much more. For 30 boys however, there is a job to be done, and that is to take home the most prized spoils (for their school) of an Interschools win. Where the intrigue comes I believe, is in what does it really take to win these big games?
In a conversation with a respected rugby coach on Saturday, he claimed that the form side always wins these games, and perhaps statistically this is the case, but I’m not 100% convinced. The nature of the game is that it creates a lot of talk and hype, which in turn puts extra pressure on the players and coaches. One of the best ways to offset pressure is belief in your ability as a team, and therefore when a team is doing well, it is likely that their self-belief is high and thus best set to cope with the pressure of the big game, enabling more wins. What I’m saying then is that belief is perhaps more important than form. It really all depends which way you look at it. A team who may not be in top form, may still find ways still to have a high level of self belief and thus the form issue becomes less important.
Another generally accepted theory is that the team who wants it more will win. Now this may be the case in some ways, but I have yet to find many teams who cannot motivate themselves for the big game. I believe however, the team who has attached more meaning to the win, or to their season as a whole will be the team who may show the better mindset for the game. They will have discussed the importance of the game, what it means to them personally to win, and all members will have a similar idea of why they want to win and how they will do so. A purpose for a sports team, and attaching meaning to that purpose is one of the first things I would do with any team, as if this base is set clearly, motivation problems rarely exist.
So it will be interesting to see which team shows the greater belief and desire but also which team is able to play for the full game at their optimal levels. Will one of the team’s have tired themselves out in all the build-up, will they find the pressure a little too great to handle or will they put more focus onto the opponents and forget about their own game? We as spectators are just not sure in a big derby which team will be able to hit their straps the best, as the variables are always greater, as mentioned above, but that’s what makes these fixtures so intriguing.
Good luck to both sides, but I’ll be in Blue on Saturday.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Monday, July 12, 2010
The TEAMS won!
The World Cup really showed to be a great spectacle. Great fun, and superb to see some of the best athletes in the world in our back garden.
What fascinated me was to see that the teams who really did well, were the ones who truly were teams. The Uruguayans, for all their failings looked a spirited and united bunch. Both finalists showed throughout that they played together and for each other, having loads of fun whilst doing so. And then the Germans, who were so well-drilled, asked to play out of position sometimes, positive yet humble in the press, and exceptionally enthusiastic, showing us all that the German pragmatism does not interfere with entertainment.
The teams with the coach-blasters, France, Portugal and England all perished early, whilst others did not just have the will-power or skill to crack it at the top. All in all a great lesson was learnt in that the teams who over-achieved were those that were a team, whilst the under-achievers in relation to their talent, went home early to think about next time!
What fascinated me was to see that the teams who really did well, were the ones who truly were teams. The Uruguayans, for all their failings looked a spirited and united bunch. Both finalists showed throughout that they played together and for each other, having loads of fun whilst doing so. And then the Germans, who were so well-drilled, asked to play out of position sometimes, positive yet humble in the press, and exceptionally enthusiastic, showing us all that the German pragmatism does not interfere with entertainment.
The teams with the coach-blasters, France, Portugal and England all perished early, whilst others did not just have the will-power or skill to crack it at the top. All in all a great lesson was learnt in that the teams who over-achieved were those that were a team, whilst the under-achievers in relation to their talent, went home early to think about next time!
Backs to the Wall is Best?
An extremely disappointing Bok test match started my weekend off with a whimper and left me pondering just what went wrong? Fatigue, jet-lag, lack of preparation time etc all crossed through my mind. The very first thing most people point to when looking for reasons for defeat is lack of motivation or a poor coach. Now I do not subscribe to those as a first resort as I often think there are far more pertinent reasons for defeat in many cases. What interested me, however is that in at least 4 player interviews in the aftermath of the game, the players cited that they had not turned up mentally for the game. None more so than John Smit, who looked and sounded disgusted with Saturday’s loss. This led me to think, what could have been these mental issues on Saturday.
During the week I worked with a top local school’s rugby sides, in what I thought were some excellent sessions, in getting them to think a little about what they had to do in the weeks ahead to achieve their success, by thinking about what they had done in the past to find success. Something that sprung to me is that often when teams are the underdog, or feel they have a point to prove, they possess the greater motivation and perhaps give more. This underdog status is one that is sought by many teams as it takes pressure to perform off, as there is always an excuse that the better side won should they lose, and it creates a strong external motivator of “let’s show others how good we can be”. This is not a bad thing at all and coaches can use this as something to really fire up his troops. With the pressure off and the goal of showing people to be wrong, teams can develop a strong bond and will to succeed.
However, what happens when you are not the underdog, or have little to prove, but rather just the prize of remaining favourites and the ‘top’ side status to gain? Suddenly the pressure mounts as you are now EXPECTED to do well rather than have people hope that you do well. You have also proved all that you needed to prove, and now instead of having to prove to others (external motivation), you rely on proving to yourselves how good you are (an internal motivator) or chasing an even greater success as your primary motivation. This can sometimes be quite tough for teams, as the challenge is not as easily evident, and perhaps it doesn’t sit as easily with them due to their cultural upbringing. I believe if trained properly this can become an even stronger and deep-seated motivator. In the book, the Art of Possibilty, author Ben Zander believes very much in ‘giving people an A’ first and facilitating the path from good to even better, rather than creating undue pressure by working off a zero-base of achievement. Doing this for teams and players could be so valuable.
I believe the key here is to get teams and individuals to truly find out what motivates them, and to acknowledge that both internal and external motivation comes into play in different situations for different teams and individuals. People need to be aware of how they are motivated, as do teams. I would not want to make a definite statement as to why the Boks lost on Saturday, but I truly believe that we as a country sometimes get trapped into thriving on the underdog status, and will to retreat into our laager and “let’s ‘show them” mentality as a first port of call. This leaves the favourites and ‘little to prove’ perch as foreign, scary and not nearly as exciting. I’d be interested to hear any thoughts?
All the best to all schools and club coaches and players with the 2nd half of the season, long may the game where feigning injury and screaming at referees is frowned upon, continue!!
During the week I worked with a top local school’s rugby sides, in what I thought were some excellent sessions, in getting them to think a little about what they had to do in the weeks ahead to achieve their success, by thinking about what they had done in the past to find success. Something that sprung to me is that often when teams are the underdog, or feel they have a point to prove, they possess the greater motivation and perhaps give more. This underdog status is one that is sought by many teams as it takes pressure to perform off, as there is always an excuse that the better side won should they lose, and it creates a strong external motivator of “let’s show others how good we can be”. This is not a bad thing at all and coaches can use this as something to really fire up his troops. With the pressure off and the goal of showing people to be wrong, teams can develop a strong bond and will to succeed.
However, what happens when you are not the underdog, or have little to prove, but rather just the prize of remaining favourites and the ‘top’ side status to gain? Suddenly the pressure mounts as you are now EXPECTED to do well rather than have people hope that you do well. You have also proved all that you needed to prove, and now instead of having to prove to others (external motivation), you rely on proving to yourselves how good you are (an internal motivator) or chasing an even greater success as your primary motivation. This can sometimes be quite tough for teams, as the challenge is not as easily evident, and perhaps it doesn’t sit as easily with them due to their cultural upbringing. I believe if trained properly this can become an even stronger and deep-seated motivator. In the book, the Art of Possibilty, author Ben Zander believes very much in ‘giving people an A’ first and facilitating the path from good to even better, rather than creating undue pressure by working off a zero-base of achievement. Doing this for teams and players could be so valuable.
I believe the key here is to get teams and individuals to truly find out what motivates them, and to acknowledge that both internal and external motivation comes into play in different situations for different teams and individuals. People need to be aware of how they are motivated, as do teams. I would not want to make a definite statement as to why the Boks lost on Saturday, but I truly believe that we as a country sometimes get trapped into thriving on the underdog status, and will to retreat into our laager and “let’s ‘show them” mentality as a first port of call. This leaves the favourites and ‘little to prove’ perch as foreign, scary and not nearly as exciting. I’d be interested to hear any thoughts?
All the best to all schools and club coaches and players with the 2nd half of the season, long may the game where feigning injury and screaming at referees is frowned upon, continue!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
