Dr Simon Phelan

Within the domain of coach education researchers have long called for a paradigm shift, whereby the quality of coaching practice is no longer measured against a checklist of prescribed competencies. This desire to evolve coach education and development, has been aligned to the need to better identify, understand and utilise what adaptive skill and expertise looks, sounds and feels like across specific sport coaching contexts. This paper outlines a broader research plan for the Premier League to drive the progress of research informed practice, in turn shaping a coach development agenda focused on developing adaptive and skilful coaches within Academies. In turn, this is a core feature of the Premier Leagues institutional aim of developing the most skilful coaches in the world. However, in order to begin the process of initiating such a shift in the way things work, there is a need to seek first to understand, before being understood. Therefore, to demonstrate an evidence informed basis to this shift within coach education and development, we ask three questions; (1) Do we understand what the coaches with the highest level of expertise can do? (2) How should we identify coaches with expertise across different contexts? (3) What does coaching expertise research need to do? In answer to these questions, we present the lack of empirical investigation previously conducted in the sports coaching discipline to explore coaching expertise and draw on wider domains to offer possible capacities of skilful coaches who possess expertise. To identify coaches with expertise, coherent with the broader expertise literature, we suggest that this is best conducted via means of social validation. Finally, we offer a road map of investigation designed to explore expertise, formed of a mix of evidence informed methodologies which have not yet been utilised in sport coaching research.

The emergence of ‘pracademics’ in the field of sport coaching, individuals who blend practical coaching expertise with scientific enquiry, has garnered increasing attention. Positioned to bridge the gap between academia and practice, pracademics are expected to bring practical wisdom and contextual knowledge into scholarly activities. However, we pose the need to critically examine the concept of the pracademic, and their service to both industry and academia while sounding a note of caution in an increasingly commercialised sector. We do so by exploring the retrospective reflections of an early career researcher (the lead author) in navigating the role of pracademic in an increasingly neoliberal space. We contend that caution is needed in the blind pursual towards the role of the pracademic, calling on greater collaborative efforts to protect early career academics, challenge neoliberal structures and for the continued engagement with thoughtful and critical research and knowledge exchange in sport coaching.

Background: Concussion in sport is an ongoing global concern. The head injury assessment (HIA) by the feld of play is acknowledged as the frst step in recognising and identifying concussion. While previous systematic literature reviews have evaluated the sensitivity of side-line screening tools and assessment protocols, no systematic review has evaluated the research designs and assessments used in a feld setting. This systematic review investigated existing screening and diagnostic tools used in research as part of the HIA protocol to identify concussion that are currently used in professional, semi-professional and amateur (club) sports settings. Methods: A systematic searching of relevant databases was undertaken for peer-reviewed literature between 2015 and 2020. Results: Twenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies were of moderate to good quality, reporting a variety of designs. The majority of studies were undertaken in professional/elite environments with medical doctors and allied health practitioners (e.g., physical therapists) involved in 88% of concussion assessments. While gender was reported in 24 of the 26 studies, the majority of participants were male (77%). There was also a variety of concussion assessments (n=20) with the sports concussion assessment tool (SCAT) used in less than half of the included studies. Conclusion: The majority of studies investigating concussion HIAs are focused on professional/elite sport. With concussion an issue at all levels of sport, future research should be directed at non-elite sport. Further, for research purposes, the SCAT assessment should also be used more widely to allow for consistency across studies.

We examined how two elite British sports organizations began accepting behaviors that might challenge ethical and professional standards. The data for the current paper came from two separate ethnographic studies. We used Alvesson and Einola’s Functional Stupidity to analyze the data for processes of a lack of reflexivity, lack of justification, and a lack of substantial reasoning presented in three vignettes for each case organization. We then carried out a cross-case analysis and showed that periods of significant change are high risk for the spread of unethical and unprofessional behaviors. The common rationales for accepting such behaviors were (a) you have not spent time in the trenches, (b) it has always been like this, (c) policing space, (d) I am just doing my job, and (e) giving opportunities to those close to me. Our findings suggest a sense of banality to wrongdoing where normal people slipped into ethical problem areas.

Selecting players for a team is one of the most important and recurring decisions sport coaches regularly make, impacting athletes, teams, and coaches. Despite this, relatively little is known about the information coaches use to make team selection decisions. In response to this, the following scoping review aims to (1) present literature that can offer insight into the information coaches use to make team selection decisions and (2) provide a platform from which researchers, practitioners, and coaches can explore this often taken-for-granted decision. The systematic literature search was conducted following guidelines set out by PRISMA. Given the small number of studies found (N=16), the extant literature fails to fully answer the question of why some players are selected and others are not. Results are therefore discussed in light of key theoretical approaches to decision making (i.e., information processing, naturalistic decision-making, and ecological psychology) to demonstrate the value of adopting each in specific instances in order to further our understanding of coaches’ team selection decisions.

Concussion is a growing issue within sport, including within soccer. Despite the developing medical understanding of concussion, there is still an array of sociocultural discourses and misconceptions around it. In the 2018 UEFA Champions League Final, Liverpool Football Club goalkeeper Loris Karius suffered a head collision in the 48th minute. Postmatch, he was subsequently diagnosed as being concussed. As a result of his concussion, Karius’ performance was arguably impeded, with suggestions that this may have resulted in him making some key errors in the game. Through an analysis of media framing in 52 news articles in the days following the incident, four dominant frames were identified: deflection away from concussion, misunderstanding concussion, education on concussion, and recommendations. Frames that focussed on the lack of awareness and preventative measures that are present in soccer served to highlight the lack of significance afforded to concussion at this particular point in time. In particular, we highlight differences in concussion discourses between those working inside and outside the soccer industry. Overall, these findings contribute to the growing body of sociological work examining concussion in sport.