Before we proceed, a disclaimer: this article delves into some thorny topics and emotive issues. Whilst this is not my intention, due to the nature of the subject matter the content might upset or even offend some readers. With that disclosure in mind, please consider carefully before proceeding to read this. Thanks for your considered judgement.
Recent scandals, including multiple allegations and criminal cases of serious abuse, have rocked sport around the world. Perhaps the most egregious example is the case of USA gymnastics, which should serve as a cautionary tale for everybody involved in sport at all levels. Against this backdrop, there has been something of an avalanche of allegations of bullying and improper conduct that are presently playing out in the public sphere. In turn, this has prompted calls for national sporting bodies to be less obsessively driven by winning medals. The perils of the ‘winning at all costs’ mentality have been cited as the reason behind the toxic environments and climate of fear that has been alleged in multiple sports, notably in the investigations that are presently ongoing within the UK. But of course winning on the world stage does come at a cost, both financial and personal. So where should we draw the line?
BLURRED LINES…
Clearly we have a major problem when the obsessive pursuit of sporting success causes all parties involved (including the bodies providing funding) to lose sight of right and wrong. There are some non-negotiables and constraints that should not be violated in the pursuit under any circumstances. These vary somewhat depending on the country, but a common example would be winning clean without cheating in competition or using performance enhancing drugs when preparing performers.
On the other hand we also cannot lose sight of the mission for the competitors and everybody supporting the endeavour; that is, to push to the limits to out-perform the opposition on the biggest stage. It is important that we view conduct and whatever actions that are taken through this prism. By definition, when we are operating in elite sport, everything is about the performance outcome.
FRAME OF REFERENCE…
Adopting this perspective it becomes problematic when everything starts to be played out in the court of public opinion. Cases of serious (and criminal) abuse can become conflated with miscellaneous complaints regarding conduct of staff and disputes about decisions and other actions taken, which are far less clear cut. The criteria for what is deemed to be psychological and emotional abuse, or indeed bullying, are far from clear or consistent at present. Likewise the terms ‘toxic environment’ and ‘culture of fear’ are being applied both in cases that objectively merit the description and other instances that are far more questionable.
We are in danger of a scenario where cases of criminal abuse and serious malpractice are discussed in the same terms as instances where an athlete claims a coach spoke to them harshly in front of others. When terms such as misconduct, bullying and even ‘abuse’ are employed so loosely, or misappropriated entirely, we find ourselves in the present situation where coaches and support staff are gingerly trying to negotiate a landscape where the boundaries are continually being redefined in the most capricious manner. In other words, it is fast becoming a minefield and the position for coaches and practitioners might soon become untenable.
Sadly the present situation is in part a consequence of the failure of governing bodies to effectively police themselves and deal competently with complaints ‘in-house’. High profile cases where various agencies were found to have repeatedly failed to adequately investigate serious allegations or even been complicit in covering up criminal abuse and malpractice have robbed these institutions of their credibility and public trust.
On the other hand, when allegations play out in the public sphere this is problematic in other ways. Those who are not familiar with operating in an elite sport environment naturally struggle to understand the context. The frame of reference is crucial to arriving at a well informed judgement. The standards and procedures from other sectors do not readily apply in the case of elite sport.
IS THERE A WAY OUT OF THE PRESENT SITUATION...?
Firstly, let us remove the sport of gymnastics from the discussion that follows. Gymnastics is unique in that even at the highest level many of the performers are minors. Clearly gymnastics requires a different benchmark when it comes to duty of care and athlete welfare; after all, we are effectively talking about child protection and there are clear and distinct laws and procedures that should govern operations in the sport and codes of conduct.
When it comes to other sports, we are dealing with consenting adults once we reach elite level. On that theme, two crucial elements to finding our way out of the present quagmire are informed consent and clearly defined expectations.
ELITE IS NOT EGALITARIAN…
Striving to be part of the most elite group (quite literally the best and most capable from the wider population) involves accepting that different standards and rules apply. The elite sport environment is unforgiving. There is no room for compromise and it is discriminatory by definition. There is no entitlement whereby an individual can expect to be granted the opportunity to represent their country (or professional team). Even once this privilege has been granted it is thereafter subject to being unilaterally taken away; and once again, no individual is entitled to expect otherwise.
To some extent we might assume that those who choose to embark on the quest to compete at the highest level understand all this and perhaps know what they are letting themselves in for. A lesson we can take from recent events is that we should not assume this is the case. Expectations must be clear and explicit upon entry and reinforced regularly thereafter.
More specifically, the terms of reference for the mission should be made clear to all parties but especially the athlete prior to embarking on what is after all a shared endeavour. There should be standard operating procedures for each respective environment (training facility, practice setting, competitions setting) to guide conduct and clearly establish the standards that are expected. Finally, there should be defined and agreed upon rules of engagement relating to the interactions between coaches, support staff and performers.
ENTERING THE CRUCIBLE…
I have previously referred to the crucible of elite sport. A crucible is a vessel or cauldron in which a material is subjected to extreme heat so that its properties are altered thereafter. When the term crucible is applied to other contexts, it refers to conditions or environments that are severely testing, so that the individual is similarly changed by the experience. This analogy certainly applies to the trials that performers face at the highest levels of competition as they pursue success on the biggest stage.
One of the few parallels for pursuing the elite sport path is the pipeline for selection to enter the elite special operations forces of the military. As with sport, the competitiveness of the selection process and low odds of success are part of the appeal of the endeavour. Candidates enter the process with the full expectation that they will be tested to their limits with the objective that in doing so they will ultimately exceed what they previously thought they were capable of.
To use the example of the Navy BUD/S (basic underwater demolition and SEAL training), candidates enroll with the full knowledge of what is involved. They freely choose to subject themselves to a notoriously grueling ordeal designed to place candidates under extreme duress and discomfort, overseen by instructors who are specifically tasked with provoking a reaction and mercilessly exploiting any signs of weakness. In some ways it is less a selection process than a deselection process; the instructors are actively trying to get candidates to quit. There is a bell to ring that candidates can use at any time to signal that they give up and during the infamous Hell Week the instructors make sure the bell is always within reach.
At this advanced stage it is not about retention but rather filtering out those who do not possess the will or physical capability to endure and exposing those who lack the temperament to handle the stressors they are subjected to. The process is designed to screen out all but the most committed and to reveal how candidates react under extreme duress and physical discomfort. In a special operations context this is salient information. Clearly this is something that the command wants to discover and rigorously test out before prospective SEAL team members reach the stage of deploying overseas in hostile territory.
To be clear, I do not think that a boot camp approach or Hell Week inspired excursions have any utility for elite sport. Whilst it might be applicable to the conditions that soldiers can expect on a military deployment, these ordeals do not replicate the conditions and specific stressors that elite performers encounter in any meaningful way. The point is that in both instances there is an equivalent need to prepare performers for battle.
Whilst the similarities are overblown (clearly it is not life or death), sport is nevertheless an adversarial and unforgiving environment. Performers face highly motivated opponents both at home and abroad who are actively seeking to break their will and dominate them physically and mentally. As coaches it is our duty to prepare athletes for the types of pressures that they will face in competition. The practice ground and training facility serves as the crucible. Part of preparing the athlete involves a tempering process to bring out ther intrinsic toughness. Tackling this in a lower stakes training context allows them to develop the tools and refine their coping strategies. In this sense, it is part of our duty of care to ensure performers are exposed to these conditions and able to equip themselves prior to entering the gladiatorial arena of competition.
IT IS A CHOICE…
Since we have established that intentionally subjecting performers to stress during practice and in training can serve a valid and important purpose, the missing piece of the puzzle is to manage expectations and secure the performer’s informed consent before we proceed. Making it explicit what they are signing up for at the outset in itself goes a long way to preemptively avoid issues down the line.
Being transparent and specific with respect to the standards and coaches’ expectations within the training environment also permits scrutiny from peers and representatives from the sport or funding body who possess the requisite understanding of the context and purpose to provide informed feedback and oversight.
Once it is abundantly clear what they are signing up for, we can reinforce regularly thereafter that the performer is there by their own volition. In other words they freely choose to participate in these trials on any given day. By extension it should be clear and explicit that they have the choice to not participate and the right to opt out permanently at any time. The coach might even go so far as to install a bell in the practice and training arena.
IN CLOSING…
For those readers who made it this far, well done. To reinforce, this discussion absolutely does not minimise the seriousness of the cases of abuse and malpractice that have come to light. As coaches and practitioners we must remain ever vigilant and it is the duty of all agencies and individuals involved to rigorously investigate any complaints of serious misconduct made by athletes.
Another caveat is that this discussion relates specifically to senior athletes at elite level. The objectives and approaches outlined are not directly applicable to junior athletes. The talent development process naturally require a very different and far more long term approach, not least given that we are dealing with minors.
For those who are operating on the ground, the proposed solutions outlined will hopefully help to achieve a level of shared understanding to allow coaches and practitioners to continue to operate effectively in the present climate whilst maintaining our duty of care to the athlete. Certainly we need to place coaches at the forefront of these efforts. Absolutely there is a need to hold coaches accountable for their conduct. Equally, rather than setting them up for failure, sporting bodies need to invest in coach education and providing the necessary support so that coaches are better equipped to navigate these issues.
Those interested in learning about the services we offer to organisations and teams can find more via the consulting section on the site. You are also welcome to reach out via the Contact page.
Found this a worthwhile read? Subscribe to get Informed Blog posts direct to your email inbox and free to share with anybody in your network who might find value. When you subscribe you will receive a link to access a course entitled Fundamentals of Physical Preparation for free.
Also check out the Books section for a host of resources that take a deeper dive on various topics relating to human performance, coaching, athletic preparation and sports injury. The recent release Prepared: Unlocking Human Performance with Lessons from Elite Sport is now available worldwide.