Coaching , Serious Player Injuries and Guilt
Coaching guilt relating to sporting injury – supported by science
The researchers cite a significant development in the latest conceptualisation of post-traumatic stress by the DSM-5 1 . The manual now includes a new category addressing negative mood and cognition . It indicates that persistent negative states involving fear , horror , anger , shame or guilt experienced as a response to an event involving serious injury are now classified as traumatic events . In other words , the science supports the theory – a player experiencing a serious injury should be recognised as a traumatic event for coaches .
The academics note research on trauma-related guilt is sparse , particularly from the perspective of a sports coach . From what does exist , guilt is generally seen as an intense and unpleasant state , accompanied by a belief that one could and should have thought , felt or acted differently .
Guilt brings with it a feeling of wrongdoing to the individual as they connect their actions ( or inactions ) with the negative outcome that has occurred . Therefore a coach experiencing guilt as a result of a player injury is likely to engage in negative self-reflection that may affect their future coaching practice .
However , as the researchers found , guilt manifests itself in many different ways . This is evident in the following three sections , which recall how the coaches interviewed for this study developed guilt when their players experienced serious injury .
Guilt as part of the coach ’ s role ?
The coaches interviewed had differing experiences of player injury and guilt . One equestrian coach described how her feelings of guilt were immediate after seeing a rider fall from a horse when delivering her first paid coaching session .
Another coach explained how his feelings of guilt transpired later on after an injury had occurred , when reflecting on what had happened to one of his players .
What is interesting to note here is that despite the feelings of guilt occurring at different times , both coaches felt these feelings were inevitable as , at a global level , the coach has responsibility for the safety of their players .
While this is true to some extent , coaches should be aware that feeling guilty for players ’ injuries is not part of a coach ’ s role , just because providing a safe environment may be .
And though the first coach felt immediate guilt whenever any of her players experienced an injury , the second coach played a more active role in developing feelings of guilt .
Specifically , when reflecting on his player ’ s injury , he set time aside to consider alternative courses of action that he could have taken to prevent the injury from happening . The academics note that hindsight bias such as this can impact negatively on a coach as they start to believe these
alternative actions were actually actions they could have taken at the time . This may lead to them questioning their own coaching ability and whether they acted appropriately in this situation .
To aid other coaches encountering similar situations in future , the team note the importance of coaches being aware of what is pre-event and what is post-event information . Being able to distinguish between the two will ensure coaches are clear about the actions they could have taken with the information they had available to them at the time .
© Steven Paston / Action Images Limited
1
( Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders [ DSM-5 ], American Psychiatric Association [ APA ], 2013 )