Assignment One - Report

SPRT718 THE DEVELOPING TALENTED PERFORMER ASSIGNMENT ONE: REPORT The training of young athletes has become increasingly structured and intensive (McKay 2016). With the advent of long term athlete development programmes and critical analysis of early sport specialisation, involvement in elite sports now spans the period of adolescence (McKay 2016).

The onset of puberty accelerates physical changes within

early adolescence (10-13 years), whereas mid-adolescence (14-16 years) and late adolescence (16-19 years) are dominated by dramatic cognitive, psychosocial and behavioural development (McKay 2016). Understanding and improving the sport and athlete development process remains a critical focus area for a very large and diverse range of sporting stakeholders (Gublin 2013). This report will focus on the processes the coaching staff; Director of Rugby (DoR) and attack coach (technical) along with the strength and conditioning (S&C) coach, at Harrogate rugby club, have adopted in relation to the progression of players from a junior to senior playing level, from a biological / psychological / social needs perspective within a performance sport environment. This report looks at the individual needs of a current player making the transition from Colts (u18) rugby to senior level. Individual characteristics of the subject can be found in figure 1.

Measurement / Value

Date Recorded

Age (years)

17

01/09/17

Height (cm)

190

01/09/17

Weight (kg)

82

01/09/17

Position

Centre

01/09/17

Standard

RFU National League, Northern Premier

01/09/17

Figure 1. Table showing individual characteristics of subject

The main objective for the club, is to create, develop and implement a range of appropriate and relevant frameworks that allows individuals to transition from junior to senior rugby, and start to advance the range of tools identified talented players have at their disposal in order to become a mainstay of the first team playing squad. The club has implemented the FTEM framework (Gublin 2013), which is illustrated in figure 2. The acronym represents the four macro stages (Foundation, Talent, Elite and Mastery), which are then further differentiated into ten micro phases (Foundations; F1, F2, F3) Talent (T1, T2, T3 & T4) Elite (E1, E2) and Mastery (M), (Gublin 2013).

By

implementing this model, it allows the club to cater for three distinct groups involved; active lifestyle, sports participation and sporting excellence. The subject in question is currently at the T3 / 4 stage. T3 Practising & Achieving; Gublin 2013 states; Having gained interest from talent scouts, coaches or national sporting organisations, athletes are now committed to higher levels of sport specific practice and striving for continual performance improvements that are focused on a benchmark outcome. T4 Breakthrough & Reward; Following transition and progression from T3, the next stage can be viewed as being “rewarded” via a University athletic scholarship, a place at a professional sporting academy or training squad (Gublin 2013).

!

Figure 2. The integrated FTEM Framework

Rugby is a field-based team sport eliciting a variety of physiological responses as a result of repeated high-intensity sprints and a high frequency of contact (Duthie 2003). Quarrie 1996 states; Rugby union players have a diverse range of physical attributes. A distinct physique will naturally orientate a player towards a particular position over others. This makes rugby an atypical sport when compared with a number of other team sports where homogeneity of physique and physical performance attributes are more common. Nicholas 1997 outlined positional groups broad physical requirements, skills and tasks;

The front-row positions demand strength and power as the players are required to gain possession of the ball, are in continual close contact with opposition, and have limited opportunities to run with the ball. The locks are generally tall, with a large body mass and power an additional advantage. The loose forwards require strength and power as a requirement of players in these positions is to gain and retain possession of the ball. It is a prerequisite for the loose forwards to be powerful and mobile in open play, have excellent speed, acceleration and endurance. A good level of endurance is required by the half backs as they control the possession of the ball obtained by the forwards. Good speed is also an important attribute for the half backs, as they need to accelerate away from the approaching defenders. Midfield backs require strength, speed and power as they have a high frequency of contact with the opposition. Outside backs require considerable speed to out-manoeuvre their opponents. They perform a large amount of support running, chasing down kicks and covering in defence. One of the most prominent changes in the sport of Rugby Union in recent years is the increased physicality, with players becoming bigger, faster, stronger (Duthie 2003).

In

response to these increased demands, investment in development programmes has increased dramatically, with developmental pathways being mapped and documented to prepare the youth athlete with the demands of the game at a senior level (Parsonage 2014). Within the club environment, Harrogate rugby have tried to replicate an academy approach with the identification and long term nurturing of talented players, adopting a holistic approach that encompasses a combination of; technical / tactical, physical, psychological and social focuses from an age of under sixteen (Parsonage 2014). Literature suggests that players entering an academy system should be at the “training to compete” stage (stage 4 of 6) on the long term athlete development (LTAD) framework (Robertson 2005), with specific skill development the main focus (Parsonage 2014). An important consideration crucial to athletic development and preparation (Robertson 2003),

is players should have received exposure and transitioned through stage 3 of the framework, “training to train” (Parsonage 2014), in which they have consolidated the basic movement patterns and skills that will underpin their sport (Balyi 2004). Harrogate Rugby have implemented a framework where u13 - u18’s have the opportunity to undertake S&C sessions twice a week focusing on physical literacy and development. Equipping young players to master basic movement skills required for rugby union conditioning earlier rather than once entering the academy may help player development and enhance physical performance (Parsonage 2014). The subject in question has been part of this physical development framework for three years. However, recent talent identification and development literature has appeared to down play the impact of physiological profiling and identification based on one-off performance ‘snapshots’, and move toward an acceptance of development as a nonlinear, dynamic and complex process (Abbott 2005, Abbott 2004, Phillips 2010). With the principal emphasis being the acknowledgment the role psychology plays as a key determinant in the realisation of potential and long term success in sport (Hill 2015). Constructs such as psychological characteristics of developing excellence (PCDEs) (MacNamara 2010a, 2010b), growth mindset (Dweck, 2006), grit (Duckworth 2007) and self-regulation (Toering 2009) have all been highlighted as pivotal in enabling athletes to negotiate the pathway or developmental stages to excellence in a range of performance domains (Hill 2015), essentially providing the skills individuals need to negotiate key developmental opportunities and challenges (MacNamara 2010a, 2010b). An interesting point of note is the identification of supposed dark side characteristics and attributes that have the distinct possibility of hampering or stifling talent (Hogan 2001, 2003).

Rather than being purely an absence of positive qualities , these dysfunctional

dispositions (Hill 2015) have been associated with poor social and occupational performance (Hogan 2001), degrading whatever skills and competencies may be initially

present (Nelson 2009), and requires the coach / practitioner to be aware of and mitigate their impact. The monitoring of such characteristics is important as failure to achieve elite sporting success may be as much a function of these dysfunctional dispositions as it might the absence of those positive psychological characteristics already shown to be determinants of athletic success (Hill 2015). There is now evidence at non-elite [Burton 1988, Gould 1981, Thomas 1999, Crust 2010, Coffee 2011, Gucciardi 2015), junior elite [Holt 2004, Ward 2007, Hardy 2014) level that more successful athletes display higher levels of motivation, confidence, perceived control, mental toughness, and resilience (Rees 2016), in situations that can be described as high pressure and require a wide range of psychological skills such as; goal setting, anxiety control, imagery, self talk, and decision making (Rees 2016). One key applied issue is the extent to which psychological characteristics of developing excellence should be sport-specific, or whether a more generic set exists (MacNamara 2011). The benefits of generic approaches to talent development are significant since teaching psychological characteristics of developing excellence may aid the transition of athletes ‘‘cut’’ from elite sport pathways (MacNamara 2011). Harrogate Rugby is exploring the use of the Psychological Characteristics of Developing Excellence Questionnaire (PCDEQ). Such a tool is important to provide regular feedback and refinement, and to identify areas that require immediate attention, improvement, or maintenance (MacNamara 2011), which can be found at appendix A. Athlete self report measures (ASRM) are a simple and inexpensive approach to monitoring an athletes perceived physical and psychological well being (Halson 2014).

These

measures or protocols have been adopted by various staff members within high performance environments as a means to detect and prevent undesired training outcomes (Taylor 2012). These beneficial outcomes are intended to result from the process whereby athletes record data, after which staff review the data, add further context, and determine

what actions are necessary (Saw 2015b).

Harrogate Rugby has adopted an ASRM,

consisting of a pre & post session questionnaire, which can be found at appendix B. The pre session questionnaire is a well being is a five question report addressing; quality of sleep, nutrition, delayed onset of muscle soreness (DOMS), level of fatigue and well-being. Sleep is important for memory and learning. An athlete who has a lack of sleep will not perform complicated tasks as well as the athlete with a good nights sleep (Siegel 2005). Athletes differ from the general population and factors that may alter the requirement for sleep among various sports include: training volume and intensity, training timetable and psychological stress of training (Cummiskey 2013). Athletic performance, and recovery from exercise are enhanced by optimal nutrition (Rodriguez 2010). During this period of maturation, growth and development it is vitally important that relevant, appropriate and sufficient nutrition is consumed. The experience of severe DOMS can adversely affect various aspects of performance, alter biomechanical execution of movement, reduce strength and power and place an athlete at increased risk of injury (Smith 1992). Fatigue and wellbeing scores allow the thorough assessment of athletes to identify and understand their needs, and appropriately intervene with each athlete (Gardner 2006). Each question is scored one to ten, with scores allowing coaches to make an informed decision as to the participation of that individual during the session.

For example, if

someone scores highly on DOMS or fatigue, it is highly unlikely they would complete any form of contact during the session. The post session questionnaire is a differential rate of perceived exertion (dRPE) report exploring; cognitive, muscular and cardiovascular stress. These values then inform the coaching staff as to the next session in order to manage acute and chronic workload. A key determinant of the efficacy of ASRM implementation is whether or not an athlete actually uses the measure consistently across a training period

(Saw 2015a).

Data in this area is collected and analysed every session, allowing the

coaching staff to identify trends or patterns. The time and effort required to complete a measure is determined by the design of the measure, including factors such as the utilisation of technology, usability, and accessibility at any time and place (Saw 2015a).

DATA COLLECTION This case study sets out to investigate a range of biological, and psycho-social factors that influence performance and the talent development process, through a series of qualitative and quantitative processes. Methods: The various measurements are carried out on a daily or periodical basis. For the daily measurements a qualitative ASRM is used. A wellbeing questionnaire consisting of five questions is completed prior to the commence of every session.

A post session

differential Rate of Perceived Exertion (dRPE) scale questionnaire is completed within thirty minutes of the session finishing. Periodical measurements take place on a bimonthly basis and cover both qualitative and quantitative methods. All senior players undergo regular physical performance testing assessing levels of strength (1RM front squat & incline bench press, maximum number of chins), power (countermovement jump) and speed (5 / 10 / 20m for forwards and 10 / 20 / 40m for backs). Psychological scores are collated via the PCDEQ, the subject read through the questions at their own pace and evaluated their performance against each of the criteria. For the technical assessment, values were recorded for the player, attack coach, DoR and S&C Coach where appropriate. The assessment framework can be found at Appendix C.

RESULTS

Figure 3 Showing recorded values from the pre session questionnaire over a period of sessions

The results in figure 3 are the individual pre session questionnaire scores that investigate well being over the period of one month.

Sleep Scores are consistent over the period of time evaluated with scores never rising above a value of 3, giving the indication the subject is well rested and able to perform well cognitively and physically. Nutrition Scores are generally consistent and never rising above a value of 4, giving the impression that timing of consumption and relevant macro nutrients are been given consideration. Delayed Onset of Muscle Soreness (DOMS) Values ranged from 4 to 6 indicating that full recovery may not be taking place on a day to day basis, and although DOMS may not be presenting in a way that limits range of motion, it may be limiting force and / or velocity output. Fatigue Scores range in value from 2 to 5, with four consecutive sessions rated as a 5, again suggesting adequate recovery is not taking place. Well Being Scores range from 2 to 4, suggesting the subject is managing to find a balance between the various components of his life; school, social, sport and work.

! Figure 4 Showing recorded values from the post session questionnaire over a period of sessions Figure 4 show the individual scores for session dRPE over the period of one month. Cognitive scores range from 3 to 8 with an average of 5, suggesting the sessions are mentally strenuous for the subject, and require conscious thought and processing in order to achieve the outcomes. The subject finds the sessions demanding on the muscular system will scores ranging from 4 to 9, these scores may reflect the differing level of

intensity he is now competing at. The cardiovascular system scores range from 4 to 8, again advocating a rise in training intensity. The scores for muscular RPE also link closely to the subjects fitness test data, which is shown in figure 5.

Figure 5 A radar graph illustrating individual results against a physical performance test battery and benchmark data The benchmark figure is the normative data for the senior playing squad, and what we would consider to be the minimum level of attainment to be considered a first team player. The subject meets or surpasses the benchmark figure for measurements of power (CMJ) and speed (10, 20 & 40m), but is considerably below it for upper body strength, and whilst lower body strength is closer it is still below the benchmark figure suggested for the playing squad.

! Figure 6 The number of times a set value was recorded for the individual segments of the PCDEQ The subjects assessment tend towards the “like me” end of the scoring scale for most of the questions with no scores for “very unlike me”. The area of the question that stands out with regard to that scoring is the coping with performance and developmental pressures, where scores of 2, dominate.

The final assessment is that of the technical framework that the coaches have devised for all players within the squad, as seen in figure 7.

! Figure 7 Illustrating the values each respective individual scored the subject against the technical framework The subject has rated themselves as technically competent all round, in comparison the technical coaches have highlighted factors they see as real strength within the subjects game as well as areas to develop.

GOALS & STRATEGIES Following the analysis of the individual chosen for this report, a number of SMART goals have been identified. Number One To increase absolute and relative levels of strength to a minimum of benchmark figures by the start of the 2018 - 19 season. Number Two To meet with either the DoR or Attack Coach a minimum of twice per month to evaluate performances Number Three To spend 10 - 15 minutes at the end of every session working on kicking technique, both from the tee, and out of hand.

REFERENCES Abbott, A. Button, C. Pepping, G. Collins, D. (2005). Unnatural selection: Talent identification and development in sport. Nonlinear Dynamics Psychology and Life Sciences. 9 (1), 61–88. Abbott, A. Collins, D. (2004). Eliminating the dichotomy between theory and practice in talent identification and development: considering the role of psychology. Journal of Sports Sciences. 22, 395–408. Balyi, I. Hamilton, A. (2004). Long-term athlete development: Trainability in childhood and adolescence. Windows of opportunity, optimal trainability. Victoria: National Coaching Institute British Columbia & Advanced Training and Performance Ltd. Burton, D. (1988). Do anxious swimmers swim slower? Reexamining the elusive anxietyperformance relationship. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology. 10 (1), 45–61. 
 Coffee, P. Rees, T. (2011). When the chips are down: effects of attributional feedback on self-efficacy and task performance following initial and repeated failure. Journal of Sports Science. 29 (3), 235–45. Coffee, P. Rees, T. Haslam, S. (2009). Bouncing back from failure: the interactive impact of perceived controllability and stability on self-efficacy beliefs and future task performance. Journal of Sports Science. 27 (11), 1117–24. Crust, L. Azadi, K. (2010). Mental toughness and athletes’ use of psychological strategies. European Journal of Sport Science. 10 (1), 43–51. Cummiskey, J. Natsis, K. Papathanasiou, E. Pigozzi, F. (2013). Sleep and athletic performance. European Journal of Sports Medicine. 1 (1), 13-22. Duckworth, A. Peterson, C. Matthews, M. Kelly, D. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 93, 1087–1101. Duthie, G. Pyne, D. Hooper, S. (2003). Applied Physiology and Game analysis of rugby union. Sports Medicine. 33, 973–991. Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Random House. Ford, P. Croix, M. Lloyd, R. Meyers, R. Moosavi, M. Oliver, J. Till, K. Williams, C. (2011). The Long-Term Athlete Development model: Physiological evidence and application. Journal Of Sports Sciences. 29 (4), 389-402. Gardner, F. Moore, Z. (2006). Clinical sport psychology. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Giles, K. (2007). Developing PHYSICAL Competence. Modern Athlete & Coach. 45 (1), 8-12. Gould, D. Weiss, M. Weinberg, R. (1981). Psychological characteristics of successful and nonsuccessful big ten wrestlers. Journal of Sport Psychology. 3, 69–81. 


Gublin, J. Croser, M. Morley, E. Weissensteiner, J. (2013). An integrated framework for the optimisation of sport and athlete development: A practitioner approach. Journal of Sports Sciences. 31 (12), 1319-1331. Gucciardi, D. Peeling, P. Ducker, K. (2015). When the going gets tough: Mental toughness and its relationship with behavioural perseverance. Journal of Science & Medicine in Sport. Halson, S. (2014). Monitoring training load to understand fatigue in athletes. Sports Medicine. 44, 139-147. Hardy, L. Bell, J. Beattie, S. (2014). A neuropsychological model of mentally tough behavior. Journal of Personality. 82 (1), 69–81. Hill, A. MacNamara, A. Collins, D. (2015). Psychobehaviorally based features of effective talent development in rugby union: A coach’s perspective. The Sport Psychologist. 29, 201-212. Hogan, J. Holland, B. (2003). Using theory to evaluate personality and job-performance relations: A socioanalytic perspective. The Journal of Applied Psychology. 88 (1), 100–112. Hogan, R. Hogan, J. (2001). Assessing leadership: A view from the dark side. International Journal of Selection and Assessment. 9 (1), 40–51. Holt, N. Dunn, J. (2004). Toward a grounded theory of the psychosocial competencies and environmental conditions associated with soccer success. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology. 16 (3), 199–219. MacNamara, A. Collins, D. (2011). Development and initial validation of the psychological characteristics of developing excellence questionnaire. Journal of Sports Sciences. 29 (12), 1273-1286. MacNamara, A. Button, A. Collins, D. (2010a). The Role of Psychological Characteristics in Facilitating the Pathway to Elite Performance. Part 1: Identifying Mental Skills and Behaviours. The Sport Psychologist. 24, 52–73. MacNamara, A. Button, A. Collins, D. (2010b). The Role of Psychological Characteristics in Facilitating the Pathway to Elite Performance. Part 2: Examining Environmental and Stage-Related Differences in Skills and Behaviours. The Sport Psychologist, 24, 74–96. McKay, D. Broderick, C. (2016). The adolescent athlete: A developmental approach to injury risk. Pediatric Exercise Science. 28, 488-500. McKeown, I. Ball, N. (2013). Current practices of long term athlete development of junior athletes in high performance sport environments. Journal Of Australian Strength & Conditioning. 21 (1), 16-25. Nelson, E. Hogan, R. (2009). Coaching on the Dark Side. International Coaching Psychological Review. 4 (1), 9-21.

Nicholas, C. (1997). Anthropometric and physiological characteristics of rugby union football players. Sports Medicine. 23 (6), 375-396. 
 Parsonage, J. Williams, R. Rainer, P. McKeown, I. Wiiliams, D. (2014). Assessment of conditioning specific movement tasks and physical fitness measures in talent identified under 16 year old rugby union players. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 28 (6), 1497-1506. Phillips, E. Davids, K. Renshaw, I. Portus, M. (2010). Expert Performance in Sport and the Dynamics of Talent Development. Sports Medicine. 40 (4), 271–283. Quarrie, K. Handcock, P. Toomey, M. (1996). The New Zealand rugby injury and performance project: IV. Anthropometric and physical performance comparisons between positional categories of senior A rugby players. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 30, 53-56. 
 Rees, T. Hardy, L. Gullich, A. Abernethy, B. Cote, J. Woodman, T. Montgomery, H. Laing, S. Warr, C. (2016). The Great British Medalists Project: A review of current knowledge on the development of the worlds best sporting talent. Sports Medicine. 46 (8), 1041-1058. Robertson, S. Way, R. (2005). Long-term athlete development. Coaches Rep 11, 6–13. Rodriguez, N. DiMarco, N. Langley, S. (2010). Nutrition and athletic performance. Medscape Saw, A. Main, L. Gastin, P. (2015a). Impact of Sport Context and Support on the Use of a Self-Report Measure for Athlete Monitoring. Journal Of Sports Science & Medicine. 14 (4), 732-739. Saw, A. E. Main, L. Gastin, P. (2015b) Role of a self-report measure in athlete preparation. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research 29, 685-691. Siegel, J. (2005). Clues to the function of mammalian sleep. Nature. 437, 1264-71. Smith, L. (1992). Causes of delayed onset of muscle soreness and the impact on athletic performance: A review. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 6 (3), 135-141. Taylor, K. Chapman, D. Cronin, J. Newton, M. Gill, N. (2012). Fatigue monitoring in high performance sport: A survey of current trends. Journal of Australian Strength and Conditioning. 20, 12-23. Thomas, P. Murphy, S. Hardy, L. (1999). Test of performance strategies: development and preliminary validation of a comprehensive measure of athletes’ psychological skills. Journal of Sports Science. 17 (9), 697–711. Toering, T. Elferink-Gemser, M. Jordet, G. Visscher, C. (2009). Self-regulation and performance on elite and non-elite youth soccer players. Journal of Sports Sciences. 27(14), 1509–1517. Vilches, F. (2015). An athlete's long term development "the integral preparation of the developing player. Coaching & Sport Science Review. 66, 5-6.

Ward, P. Hodges, N. Starkes, J. (2007). The road to excellence: deliberate practice and the development of expertise. High Ability Studies. 18 (2), 119–53.




APPENDICES APPENDIX A

APPENDIX B PRE SESSION SLEEP QUALITY

8hrs+ of high quality sleep with no disturbances

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10