Rugby Global Calendar best for all concerned

For those unaware, my passion and strong belief for a unified Global Rugby Calendar is something I want to add weight to and hope will come to fruition during my involvement in the sport.

Another meeting held in San Francisco in late Jan 2017 saw comments from Bill Beaumont (Chairman of World Rugby) offer optimism that this may be on track.

"During a positive, collaborative and highly-productive forum, key principles were agreed that will underpin the development of the calendar which has player welfare and the harmony of the international and club game at its heart"

I want to see ideas such as extended international windows for current annual competitions and June/November internationals to be measure of all elite players, agreed club competition seasons dates (my ideas would be Euro Champions Cup and Super Rugby from late Feb-May and domestic leagues such as English, Pro12, Japanese and Currie Cups/NRC/NPC in late July-October, hopefully resulting less player movement, greater opportunities for existing or developing players  or agreed dual contracts on global scale) and global off season of December-January.

One of the main ideas for these proposed suggestions and areas surrounding mentioned discussions of player welfare include player burnout. Researchers studying the experiences of individuals in human care settings propose the burnout syndrome consists of three central characteristics: emotional exhaustion, reduced accomplishment and depersonalization (Maslach, 1982). Athlete devaluation to sport, regarded as “perhaps most cognitive of burnout dimensions” (Lemyre, 2006), has strong links to lack of autonomy (such as feelings of choice and self-directedness in sport development) and competence (perceptions of effectiveness in sport or team). Within Lonsdale’s research, he recognised that “self-determined motivation moderates the relationships that competence and autonomy had with exhaustion” (Lonsdale, 2009); both emotional exhaustion and devaluation were related to unfulfilled or lack of self-determined motivations. Ryan and Deci (2000) also believed “physiological need for relatedness may play a more distal role than competence and autonomy”. Hodge’s research echoed “high burnout players (investigated) had lower competence and autonomy scores yet didn’t report different relatedness (connection to others) scores” (Hodge, 2008). Therefore, straight away, the idea of "burned out players" would suggest less autonomy or feeling of control and competence or impact in teams or competitions involved in rather than physical exhaustion. Like I suggest, it's having the all unions of world rugby offer choices of where and when to play rugby to gain some personal sense of achievement, development or connectivity within or external to rugby circles to gain some deeper meaning in player's lives.

Athlete burnout results from “chronically frustrated or unfulfilled basic physiological needs” (Cresswell, 2006), with reduced accomplishment and devaluation featured most prominently and “denotes a negative emotional reaction to sport participation” (Gustafsson, Kenttä, Hassmén, & Lundqvist, 2007). Satisfying these basic needs shall “foster self-determined motivation” (Hollembeak, 2005)  and has been associated with “higher self-esteem, higher task engagement and lower anxiety” (Deci, 2001), which allow athletes or players to develop intrinsically defined motivation for goals or development within their sport. Basic needs satisfaction shall also result in positive psychological consequences such as adaptive coping strategies for personal development and flow experiences, ideal for player development and both consequences required for specialising adolescent athletes as part of personal development.

However, intrinsic motivation is not the only reason for lower levels of athlete burnout; Lonsdale’s research found autonomous extrinsic motivations, such as integrated or identified regulators, also resulted in lower levels of athlete burnout. Similar research sees Gustafsson (2007) report findings that team sport male athletes showed higher burnout scores (compared to individual athletes) based on emotional and physical exhaustion and devaluation of coach and co-athletes, while displaying no significant correlation between training volume and burnout scores. Therefore, the emotional support and perceived efficacy in sport is areas coaches can assist for prolonged athlete involvement, retention and engagement, which can be enhanced by understanding of what players’ value and why. Therefore, ideas such as players being able to express a sense of themselves or achieving personal valued outcomes (personal strivings) could be areas to increase athlete engagement to sports or reduce levels of dropout from rugby if adopted or encouraged. The most obvious and current example being David Pocock; having been granted 12 months away from rugby to pursue other goals should see him come back a more determined player, having satisfied other pursuits in his life.

From Gould’s research, he gained ideas for coaches such as cultivating personal involvement with players, offering two way communication, utilizing player input and understanding player’s feelings (Gould, Tuffey, Udry, & Loehr, 1996). Cresswell and Eklund (2006) also found ideas such as enjoyable challenges within rugby, open and free communication with coaches and management alongside few or flexible responsibilities outside sport allowed and encouraged player engagement and reduced burnout or dropout. Coaches and administration staff alike should take note from qualitative investigations which found attributions to burnout symptoms included transitions between competitions or stages in season, which added emotional and mental stress; pressure to comply and perform in elite environments and negative development environments, all areas which could factor and enable greater control for players and coaches alike. I believe many of these issues these could potentially be prevented with a global rugby calendar, offering greater opportunity and choice to those involved in rugby and extending opportunity to enter to the current diverse groups.

Acting on lack of leadership

Player leadership within rugby union has become a topic in point last week with Eddie Jones (England RFU Head Coach) commenting during the week of the lack of leadership within his squad.

"Apart from working on the fundamental skills and increasing the depth of the squad, one thing we need to do is increase the leadership density of the team. That's a big project going forward"

Therefore, how and who can step up and fill these vacant voids suggested in coach Jones' squad?

Quoting from past research, leaders within team environments have been seen to drive and coordinate 3 main areas or functions being task related, social functionality and external obligations (Longhead, 2006). Within team environments, we can find different forms of leadership forming through formally appointed leadership roles, informal leadership and/or peer leadership roles, whereby a person may only effect 2 or more people within the group yet their actions or input leads to influence of others. Looking at Leadership Scale for Sports (Chelladurai, 1980), within these 3 functioning areas of task, social or external, it looks at which areas players look for leadership within. These areas include training and instruction, democratic behaviour, autocratic behaviour, social support and positive feedback. So which areas of leadership is Eddie searching for...?

Studies have shown informal leaders or peer leaders can complete functions that formally appointed leaders such as Dylan Hartley cannot. Peer leaders are seen as influential on task related goals of the group as a whole and focus on team harmony and collective cohesion; these leaders offer greater impact around areas such as social support, positive feedback and can offer democratic decision making dependent on when situation requires them and to as small or large a group within the team as opposed to the when’s and whom by which expectations or protocol sets. Athlete or peer leaders engaged in social behaviors positively influence team cohesion and performance as a result (Vincer, 2010) as social cohesion has shown stronger link with performance than task cohesion (Jowett, 2004). These informal leaders are recognized by certain traits, most notably skill level amongst the playing group, the strongest index of peer leadership (Glenn & Horn 1993). Moran and Weiss (2006) also recognized peer leaders have higher perceived levels of competence and increased ability for expressiveness. A positive relationship has been demonstrated between the presence of athlete leaders and team outcomes such as player satisfaction, team cohesion, confidence and performance (Fransen, 2015); therefore, a open, honest and confident side....seemingly where England side have been for past 12-14 months. So, where else can coach Jones look towards?

Past research has recognized good teams having good leaders with strong social connectedness, which goes hand in hand with task leadership, as displays higher level of collective efficacy (Fransen, 2015). The quality of social support received is critical to group success and player satisfaction; while important to receive social support from coach-athlete relationship, the increased pressure to ensure the player does not let down their parts within the relationship can lower autonomy and intrinsic motivation through perceived controlling behaviours. Therefore, the leadership dynamics and coach’s willingness to allow player leaders to be identified, creating connected individuals and responsibility being distributed amongst the group through social networking is important within team dynamics.

Coaching success stems around the competence, confidence, connection and character developed by the athlete as a result of the coach-player relations; however, coach adopted transformational leadership styles, which look at the importance on the leader-follower relationship, would result in positive intrinsic motivations and increased athlete effort. Bass (1985) recognizes this style of leadership as the ability to inspire and motivate followers to exceed performance expectations by shaping follower’s beliefs and attitudes. This form of leadership can be developed by inspiration or motivation to team members, through creating a vision of common goals, idealizing influence through modelling behaviors or values, individualizing consideration, through allowing for other’s needs and feelings and intellectual stimulation through encouraging creativity.  However, if levels of autonomy are not offered, player’s feelings are ignored or common team goals discounted, this could move into controlling or style.

In coaches attempts to gain impact in instruction for learning or becoming task focused the coach could adopting an autocratic or controlling interpersonal style. Adopting this style puts reduces players levels of autonomy and increases pressure on the players to act, think and feel in a way consistent to the needs and wants of the coach (Amorose, 2015). In developing levels of control through power assertive techniques forcing player compliance and using social comparison for evaluation, would adopting these leadership styles for task functions while allowing player or peer leaders to satisfy individual player social relatedness and perceived group autonomy gain suitable levels of satisfaction and group cohesion? Is Eddie suggesting relinquishing some control to the players??

Previous studies suggest collective cohesion and team success should be seen as leadership driven and responsibility for all team members as high levels of individual’s intrinsic motivations are experienced when coaches exhibit a leadership style that empathized  instructional behaviors and democratic behavior rather than autocratic leadership styles (Amorose, 2007). It is recognized good teams having good leaders with strong social connectedness, which goes hand in hand with task leadership, as displays higher level of collective efficacy (Fransen, 2015). The leadership dynamics and coach’s willingness to allow player leaders to be identified, creating connected individuals and responsibility being distributed amongst the group through social networking is important within team dynamics.

For this example, would Eddie's time be spent identifying players to translate the coaching group's vision, helping develop task leaders through adopting principles of law of diffusion of innovation? As he introduces MMA training practices to improve contact work and adds visual awareness coach to improve player's awareness, continuing to push and improve player's abilities, can a strong clear vision with increased player involvement and group cohesion offer him the impact and number of leaders he is searching for? With the Six Nations kicking off in 2 weeks, time shall tell.....