*Article* **Tough Love—Impactful, Caring Coaching in Psychologically Unsafe Environments**

**Jamie Taylor 1,2,3,\* , Michael Ashford 1,4 and Dave Collins 1,3**


**Abstract:** (1) Background: The interpersonal dimensions of coaching in high performance sport have been subject to increasing scrutiny but with limited evidence to guide practice. Similarly, there is increasing practical interest in the concept of psychological safety, often portrayed as an implicitly desirable characteristic of all sporting environments but, as yet, still to receive research attention in high performance. As a first step to addressing these deficiencies, the present study addressed two research aims: (a) to examine the extent to which matched groups of international and released professional rugby union players perceived psychological safety to be an adaptive feature of their developmental experience and (b) to understand what elements of the player's coaching experience were perceived to be enabling or disenabling of future progress. (2) Methods: Seven rugby union players who had 'made it' and eight players who had been released from their professional contracts took part in a semi-structured interview exploring their developmental experiences. Data were subsequently analysed using Reflexive Thematic Analysis. (3) Results: Both groups of players found each of their talent development and high performance environments to be psychologically unsafe. Furthermore, players perceived coaches who were the most impactful in their development as offering 'tough love'. This included a range of 'harder' and 'softer' interpersonal approaches that presented the player with clear direction, role clarity and a sense of care. It appeared that this interpersonal approach helped the player to navigate, and benefit from, the psychologically unsafe high performance milieu. (4) Conclusions: There appear to be a number of balances for the coach in the high performance setting to navigate and a need for more nuance in applying constructs such as psychological safety.

**Keywords:** psychological safety; care; elite performance; talent development; challenge

#### **1. Introduction**

In recent times there has been a significant interest in the development of talent towards high performance (HP) sport [1]. This has generated a significant volume of publications from across contexts [2] and enormous sums of money spent across the world to promote athlete development. Despite this interest, however, there remains a paucity of research that is 'for' the coach, rather than 'of' coaching [3,4]. In essence, there is limited research that offers the 'granularity' [5] necessary for coaches and practitioners to make truly evidence-informed decisions [6]. This may be one of the reasons why research appears not to have made significant impact on applied practice, where a wide variety of different, even contradictory, implicitly and explicitly held constructs influence coaching [7]. Specifically in HP sport, there is a limited body of literature that has investigated truly 'elite' performers [8]. Similarly, there has been a failure to distinguish between levels of

**Citation:** Taylor, J.; Ashford, M.; Collins, D. Tough Love—Impactful, Caring Coaching in Psychologically Unsafe Environments. *Sports* **2022**, *10*, 83. https://doi.org/10.3390/ sports10060083

Academic Editors: Beat Knechtle, Adam Leigh Kelly, Sergio L. Jiménez Sáiz, Sara Diana Leal dos Santos and Alberto Lorenzo Calvo

Received: 20 April 2022 Accepted: 20 May 2022 Published: 25 May 2022

**Publisher's Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

**Copyright:** © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).

performance and understanding further development when athletes do reach the elite level [9].

#### *1.1. Psychological Safety*

In the applied domain, there is growing interest in a construct with a long history in the organisational literature, psychological safety (PS) [10]. Although there are multiple definitions in use, the concept was initially defined by Edmondson [11] as: 'a shared belief by members of a team that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking', underpinned by a number of scale items, including: the lack of 'fear of mistakes being held against you', 'it is safe to take a risk on this team' and 'working with members of this team, my unique skills and talents are valued and utilised' [11]. In the most recent definition, Edmondson suggests a dual effect: 'in psychologically safe environments, people believe that if they make a mistake or ask for help, others will not react badly' [12]. Perhaps in recognition that there are issues with the application of Edmondson's definition in sport, a recent paper redefined PS as: 'the perception that one is protected from, or unlikely to be at risk of, psychological harm in sport', with harm including perceptions of threat or fear [13].

Several issues with the application of the construct in HP have been raised. As highlighted in a recent critical review, even by redefining the construct, it is difficult to see how it can be applied to athletes in HP [14]. At the very least, it has been suggested that there is a need to apply PS in a critical manner, understanding potential downsides such as lower overall performance without accountability, or even unethical behaviour [15,16]. Similarly, there is a need to recognise the realities of the HP milieu, one in which there will nearly always be consequences for poor performance [17,18] that may challenge one's implicit safety.

Notably, despite a wave of interest in the applied domain, there remains very limited empirical investigation of the construct in sport. For instance, current examples involve high level university team sport athletes [19] and amateur rugby [20]. There is even less at higher levels of performance, for example NCAA basketball [21] and, notably, given the complex and multidimensional nature of the construct, no qualitative data that we are aware of.

#### *1.2. Challenging Coaching*

This lack of empirical investigation is notable, as one of the most robust findings in talent development (TD) research is the central role of challenge dynamics in promoting elite performance [22–26]. An example of these dynamics is the impact of early advantage in talent pathways, with athletes experiencing less challenge earlier in the pathway being more likely to be deselected as the challenge level increases [27,28]. As a result, it has been proposed that athletes can benefit from a range of affective conditions through development, as they experience a range of positive and negative experiences, so long as they can deploy the requisite psycho-behavioural skills to learn from their experiences [29,30]. Therefore, in the HP domain, it appears that a number of situations have the potential to be particularly emotionally disturbing and therefore a useful means to provoke further development [30]. Given that in nearly all cases, the coach will be responsible for a significant number of emotionally disturbing athlete experiences, whether they be positive or negative (e.g., selection), the coach has a central role to play in the wider development of the athlete, which may usefully provoke perceptions of an unsafe environment.

A number of conceptual framings of coaching practice have been suggested to understand the characteristics of effective TD environments, or 'all aspects of the coaching situation' [31]. For the coach seeking to take advantage of these dynamics, several features of TD have the potential to be impactful for the athlete including coherence of experience [32], individualisation [33] and the quality of messages received and sent by the athlete [34]. Yet, despite understanding what characterises effective coaching practice, limited literature has actively considered what the coach actually does. For example, the work of Collins and colleagues [23] suggested that the TD coaching of 'super champion' athletes

was characterised by a blend of high challenge, facilitative and relatively non-directive input, in contrast to less successful athletes where the coach drove the agenda.

There is a similar limited volume of empirical work considering the role of the HP coach, particularly as regards the enhancement of performance. As an example, the work of Lara-Bercial and Mallett [35] found the need for coaches to enforce a culture of high expectations and standards, producing an inherently challenging environment. They also introduced the term 'driven benevolence' to describe an approach where coaches cared for others and maintained optimal development through pressure. As such, there appear to be a number of interpersonal dimensions that are particularly pertinent to the coaches of current or future high performers. These include the need for setting high expectations, ensuring that athletes have role clarity [36] and doing this with a level of emotional 'elasticity' to make and communicate tough decisions, albeit in a considerate manner [35].

#### *1.3. Care*

Elsewhere there has been a growth in the literature examining the role of care in coaching. Whilst seen as a core feature of coaching practice, it is often portrayed as an addition to performance or development [37]. In contrast, the recent literature has drawn on the work of Noddings' theory of care in pedagogical relationships [38,39] to suggest a dual strand of care, where the coach should care 'for' and 'about' the athlete. To 'care for' an athlete, coaches express 'devotion and desire' to meet the needs and wants of that individual [40,41]. Such devotion is characterised by a coach's engrossment, motivational displacement and reciprocity in the coaching relationship. Engrossment refers to the sustained attention of the coach in relation to the athlete's needs and wants, consistently offering high levels of empathetic concern. Motivational displacement captures the behaviour of a coach who aims to meet the athlete's needs even if it supersedes that of their own. Finally, reciprocity implies that the care offered to a player can only be confirmed when the player receives and acknowledges it. In contrast, caring about an athlete describes a coach's emotional concern for an individual, without the need for engrossment, motivational displacement nor a reciprocal interaction.

Interestingly, others have highlighted limitations to this gentle view [41,42], suggesting that the nature of the HP milieu provides individuals with a social context where coaches may care for athletes through interactions that are harder in nature. For instance, Cronin and colleagues [40] explored the role of care within an English Premiership football environment, where the milieu was characterised as cut-throat, competitive and volatile [43,44]. They offer the conclusion that care is inherently contextual and situated within a social milieu [40]. It is this view that sits in contrast to views of dichotomous perspectives of coaching practice, particularly in HP, that have suggested a separation of person and performer, with an emphasis on the former. This false dichotomy encourages the view that care in coaching is more 'caring about', than 'caring for' an athlete. If the latter is about meeting the wants and needs of the individual, particularly in HP populations, it is likely that it will be expressed differently to a participant with different motivations [45]. Worthy of note is the idea that high performers, or ambitious developing athletes, may want or require a more robust coaching approach, which is already established in the literature [30]. Yet, confusingly, it has recently been suggested that the concept of 'tough love' may be used as a euphemism for abusive coaching practice [46]. This seems at odds with the suggestion that care should be understood within particular social circumstances; that those aspiring to an elite level of performance may require a different approach from their coaches, and the often-used idea that coaching requires holding people to high standards. Reflecting these apparent conflicts, there is a need to understand what athletes perceive to be truly developmental coaching.

As a result of the dynamics presented in the literature and the lack of overall empirical investigation, as practicing coaches and coach developers working in TD, we felt a need to investigate the dynamics involved in development and the role of the coach in this process. Thus, we sought to understand the experiences and perceptions of athletes who had progressed through a TD pathway, reaching or failing to achieve senior elite status. Given the need to understand what was considered effective and ineffective, two matched groups of successful and unsuccessful athletes were considered appropriate as a means of understanding different experiences. This takes account of calls for comparison groups in talent research [2] and the value of using negative case studies, rather than risking survivorship bias in successful samples [47]. Our ultimate purpose being to inform the practice of coaches working with athletes in the TD or HP setting. As a result, the aims of this study were: (a) to examine the extent to which two matched groups of international and released professional rugby union players perceived PS to be an adaptive feature of their developmental experience and (b) to understand what elements of the player's coaching experience were perceived to be enabling or disenabling of future progress.

#### **2. Methods**

#### *2.1. Research Philosophy, Design and Methods*

Given the aims of this study and our wish to critically explore the practical utility of popular ideas and concepts in HP sport, a pragmatic research philosophy was employed [48]. The pragmatic approach encourages the use of methods that provide findings and implications that are practically meaningful, without need to adhere to a specific epistemological view [49]. Thus, the comparison of player's perceptions of PS and their coaching experiences, between those who 'made it' and those who were released provides a pertinent investigation for anyone interested in the elite sport context.

In line with our pragmatic approach, qualitative research methods allow for a deep examination of the player group's developmental experiences [50]. Qualitative research methods allow authors to collect rich descriptive data, with an aim of producing a useful interpretation of a practical problem, rather than one that is absolute [51]. Furthermore, a pragmatic research philosophy encourages the consideration of biases and preferences to make sense of findings. Reflecting these considerations, it is important to note that this study was aided by our experience as active practitioners within HP sport and specifically in rugby union [52,53].

#### *2.2. Participants*

Two purposefully sampled groups of male rugby union players were recruited against distinct inclusion and exclusion criteria. In both cohorts, players were matched by the criteria of: (a) progressing through the English Premiership academy system between 2012 and 2018, (b) had represented their country at junior international level at either U18 and/or U20 level and (c) had signed a professional contract at a senior elite team in the English Premiership (the highest level of performance nationally). As a point of difference, the first group were players whose career status was defined as 'made it'. All had progressed through the domestic game and subsequently been selected to play for their country at senior international level (*n* = 7; Age, *M* = 22.14). Importantly, for perspective on the career status of the player, interviews took place within 6 months of players entering an international camp or playing for their country for the first time. The second group were players whose career status was defined as those who were 'released'. Those who, despite matching the first cohort as having progressed through the academy system, played junior international rugby and signed a professional contract, had been released from their professional contract (*n* = 8; Age *M* = 22.75; See Table 1 for participant career status). The comparison between these two groups allowed us to explore the developmental experiences and perceptions of coaching along similar pathways that resulted in divergent outcomes. Finally, all players were recruited to take part through personal contact and, following the protocol approval by the University Ethics Committee, completed informed consent.


**Table 1.** Participant career status.

#### *2.3. Data Collection*

Both groups of players were invited to participate in two stages of data collection, both of which took place within a wider semi-structured interview. A semi-structured interview guide was developed and refined through a pilot interview with former professional players (*n* = 2) with similar profiles to the released population, minus experience of junior international rugby. These pilot studies led to subtle refinements of the semi-structured interview guide, including clearer guidance regarding the use of graphic timeline and the refinement of questions to enhance clarity. The interview consisted of open-ended questions that elicited responses informed by appropriate literature whilst follow-up probes and prompts were planned for and used to allow expansion on key points [54]. Interviews were conducted by both the first (*n* = 10) and second (*n* = 5) authors. Rather than for the purpose of data analysis and instead as a means to enhance recall and generate rich dialogue, the first stage of the interview asked players to sketch out their playing journey in rugby union on a timeline, highlighting key moments and transitions for the player along the *Y* axis [55]. Players were asked to score their relative development in terms of progress (+5) and stagnation (−5) along the *X* axis. Following this initial stage, the interview then asked players to go through the timeline again, this time focusing more deeply on specific perceived critical periods and, importantly, the time between perceived critical events. The second stage of the interview included questions regarding players' perceptions of PS, as per definition of Edmondson [11] and coaching experiences within each age/stage of their pathway at academy club, junior international, senior club, and for the made it group, senior international levels. The interview guide is available on request from the first author. Abiding by regulations put in place by the University Ethics Committee to mitigate against the risk of COVID-19, interviews were arranged over video-conferencing software (Zoom Video Communications, California, Version 5.7) at a time and date that suited the participant. Prior to this, a pre-briefing allowed them to reflect on the timeline task and interview questions ahead of the interview. The interviews lasted between 60 and 105 min (*M* = 79 min) and were recorded for subsequent analysis.

#### *2.4. Data Analysis*

All interviews were transcribed verbatim and subsequently checked for accuracy against audio recordings. Data were then analysed using a Reflexive Thematic Analysis (TA) approach [56], using QSR NVivo Version 12 software. Against our pragmatic orientation, TA was chosen given the need to examine patterns of shared meaning across the player cohort [57]. Indeed, a core feature of TA is the recognition that the researcher plays a key role in the process of generating themes through engagement with the data. This allowed for deep reflexive engagement between researcher, data and theory (Braun and Clarke, 2019). Analysis was conducted by the first author, utilising each of the six phases initially outlined by Braun and Clarke [58]. Importantly, this took place flexibly, with

appropriate non-linear movement between phases [56]. At the first stage, the first author became familiar with the content, highlighting and annotating areas of interest. Second, coding was conducted on a surface (semantic) level, before capturing the assumptions that underpin surface meaning through multiple sweeps of analysis [57]. Third, initial themes were generated, organised and captured from the initial coding process. At the fourth stage, the second author, acting as a critical friend, supported the review and refinement of themes to quality check if they were 'coherent, consistent and distinctive' [59]. The fifth phase involved defining and naming themes based on attribution of shared meaning. The final stage was the write up and report of data [57].

#### *2.5. Trustworthiness*

Several measures were taken to ensure trustworthiness in our approach. First, member reflections were solicited by email following completion of the six-phase TA process [60]. This involved all participants being contacted and sent a tabulated form of the final themes through the TA to seek their reflections on generated themes. In addition, participants were asked if the themes reflected their own experiences and if they had any further comments or considerations. Nearly all participants chose to take part in member reflections (*n* = 14 from 15) and their additional reflections have been incorporated into the results section. Players were universally supportive of the concept of 'tough love' (as defined by this study), and something they perceived as crucially important to their overall development. One way in which member reflections deepened overall analysis was the emphasis that players put on the technical and tactical competence of the coach, in addition to the interpersonal and pedagogic dimensions of their practice. As an example, player 9 commented: 'as regards to accountability, I am all for that and with coaches who really care about my development. But it is so important that they hold you accountable for the right stuff, stuff that would have genuinely improved me'.

In addition, during data collection, the first author kept a reflexive journal reflecting on key differences and similarities between players' perceptions of PS and coaching experiences and key areas of interest in line with the research questions. This journal was also used as an audit trail, to critically consider the methodological approach and support the initial generation of codes [61]. Finally, to ensure resonance in our approach, the second author, who is an experienced qualitative researcher, acted as a critical friend throughout the process [59].

#### **3. Results**

The purpose of the study was two-fold. Firstly, to understand the perceptions of both groups of players to understand the extent to which perceptions of PS were an effective and clear feature of their development experience. Secondly, to explore what elements of the player's coaching experience were perceived to be enabling or disenabling of future progress. The first part of the results section addresses the first of these research questions, with two developed themes. The first developed theme concerns the extent to which player's perceived it to be possible that the HP rugby union environment had the potential to offer them a sense of PS. The second generated theme presents the adaptive and maladaptive consequences of these perceptions.

#### *3.1. A Lack of Psychological Safety*

Across both groups of players, a lack of PS as a near constant factor in their professional career was reported. Players described this lack of safety as being driven by the judgement inherent to the HP milieu, making them subject to consistent scrutiny and criticism. Yet, for this group, the core feature of their experience that appeared to drive perceptions of a lack of safety was the judgement conferred by selection.

There's no comfort, no safety, if you don't work hard or you perform poorly, there's eight other guys that are going to happily step in your shoes. It can be

exhausting, but it definitely helps. It's one of those places where you bring your gumshield to breakfast, you don't want to put a foot wrong. (S6)

Players perceived their coaches to be central in engineering a lack of safety. They expressed that this was due to the coach's role in making selection and contractual decisions:

It's the most uncomfortable environment I've been in . . . if you were making a mistake because you weren't switched on, it was a major issue. I wasn't on it for a session, (coach) picked up on it straight after, he told me that I was going to be in the starting 15, but I'd worked my way out of it and that it would be tough to get back in. It was a good lesson for me, I reacted my usual way, when I've had a kick up the a\*se, that's where I've sat down and properly had a think about what I need to do and where I need to be . . . when I'm under that intense pressure, I feel a bit on edge, at the time it doesn't feel great, afterwards, you know you've progressed a lot. (S5)

Additionally, where players were part of strong playing squads, this lack of safety was also experienced because of peer comparison, selection pressure and the consequent intra-group competition. In essence, at both the individual and organisational level, players felt that safety was incongruous with the nature of the HP milieu.

#### *3.2. A Double-Edged Sword*

Rather than these perceptions being debilitating, the ability to cope with and develop in a psychologically unsafe environment appeared critical to their progress. As a particularly prominent factor amongst the 'made it' group, players appeared to respond adaptively to a lack of safety. Take for example player three's (S3) early experience of international rugby:

(International coach) pulled me in on the Wednesday morning before we trained. He says: 'we're gonna start you' . . . I woke up a day later to a text saying you need to see (coach). He said: 'I'm not picking you, you didn't train well, XXX had the upper hand on you'. I went away and had a think, I knew what (coach) wanted and what he was trying to do . . . I had to find gears I never had before in training. I thought I was leaving it all out there, but somehow, I wasn't. It brought far more out of me. The game is mad, you can be on top of the world for 48 h before and then rock bottom. That camp was a perfect example and although it was traumatic at the time, I look back on it and I loved it, it definitely improved me.

As a comparison, consider the response of player eight (S8), reflecting on deselection from an international U20 squad:

A couple of players got picked ahead of me and I was thinking, what more could I be doing? I'm playing well, starting in (on loan in lower league) ahead of players who are on the bench (at a lower level). Why is this fair? Why is this happening? It especially annoyed me because I felt like they took (player) because of his brother. It was a stitch up.

As such, what appeared to be adaptive or positive was not the perception of safety. Rather, it was how individual players responded to the nature of the milieu. Indeed, maladaptive responses to this lack of safety were a prevalent and indeed, derailing factor for some of those players unable to transition from age group international to senior elite performance. One that seemed to be exacerbated where a player's developmental experience had been overly safe and lacking the demands of the senior game: 'through the academy, life was easy, rugby was easy. Then, you go from being big fish in a small pond to a small fish in a huge pond. I found it so hard' (R6). Notably, players who perceived their development experience to be very safe, expressed that such environments did not adequately prepare them for the demands of the HP milieu.

This does not suggest that players believed that they were consistently able to respond adaptively; their experiences seemed to also change over time. Whilst the nature of the milieu remained the same, it was the player that seemed to change. Take for example the changing experiences of player four (S4) as he began to deploy psycho-behavioural skills to manage the demands placed on him as he reflected on two stages of his career. Firstly, as he began in the senior training environment:

In my first year, I was terrified of making mistakes. You're new on the scene, you're a young guy and thrown into training with players like XXX [a senior international and club stalwart] and you don't want to f\*ck up. I felt I trained within myself for a lot of that period. I've addressed that now but there's still a lot of pressure . . . nobody's position is safe.

Players from both groups held the perspective that a lack of safety, rather than being debilitating, was an adaptive feature of their environment. Note the perceived differences for player four (S4), as he began embedding himself into a senior international squad:

When you don't have expectation, you don't perform at the level you need to. If you feel like a bit safe, when there's no expectation, you think you can coast. When everyone is competing for a spot, that gets the best out of everyone. The squad depth at (international) is ridiculous. Everyone's battling so hard to play, it's so competitive. I thrive in that. I like the intensity but there's a couple of players who don't thrive in those environments.

When players did perceive a level of safety, often reported to be outside of the HP milieu, this was seen subsequently as a negative factor in their development; seemingly prompting stagnation over the longer term. In the case of player 13 (R6), when he was loaned out to a semi-professional team:

It sounds silly, but I was very confident in my position (at loan club). I wasn't going to dropped for a 19 year old student or a 28 year old plumber. I think that's the problem, especially during that time. I needed to be pushed, I just wasn't. I accepted that I'll be playing for this team every weekend on loan.

It appeared that, rather than seeking safety and the certainty of their position, players were appreciative of being held accountable for their performance and the processes necessary for their continued development. Where this accountability and judgement was absent, it was perceived to be a negative developmental factor. Players also perceived this to be important at the group level, where the collective response to a lack of safety was seen as a key determinant of team performance:

(Club coach), when you don't get selected, looks at how hard you train. It's almost 10 times harder when you're not getting picked because you got to push yourself even harder. In that sense it's a good environment, when you play the non-selected in training and all of them are all p\*ssed off, that preps you for the weekend. It's probably a difference between teams because in some places players don't get picked and sulk. This place is completely different, it fires people up. (S3)

Players also described a lack of safety as prompting increased effort and attention to detail. The pressure conferred by a lack of safety was also significantly fatiguing and long-term exposure left players exhausted:

I was just so tired, not so much physically, but mentally. I just couldn't get away from all the pressure. The lockdown (COVID) came at just the right time for me, I really enjoyed it. It was just what I needed because those two years, not doing well at (club) were really tough. I took that quite personally and struggled with it. So the lockdown was almost like a restart button. (S1)

I was straight out of school. I finished the (international U18) stuff, finished my last exam then the next day I was straight into (club). I couldn't get used to the pressure, needing to be on it all the time. I was tired and just didn't cope with it, it was a chore from the beginning. (R7)

The perception of fatigue was most strongly felt where levels of safety were lowest and for extended periods of time. Despite this, however, there was a perception that this was highly developmental, both in the short term, driving them to higher standards and greater effort and, when this pressure was reduced, there was a perception that players were better able to cope with lower pressure in other environments:

Being at (international), you feel like you have to step up a level, or you will just get sent home. It feels like you are on X Factor! I feel like I have to be on point every session or I am going to be embarrassed. You have (coach) prowling around watching everything as well. Everything that you do is going to get judged, it either pushes you into your shell, or drives you to perform. I found it hard to adjust, but going back into club rugby, I felt so much more relaxed. I felt like I could go at the same intensity, but I wasn't as stressed out, it was like I had adapted to the stress and could get the same results. It helped me massively from a mental point of view. (S7)

Players' reflections were complex; there was a highly individual and contextually mediated response to a lack of PS. In nearly all cases, players felt that high pressure and a lack of safety was very uncomfortable at the time, but through the deployment of different psycho-behavioural skills, negative impacts were moderated and could become a developmental stimulus. Where players lacked the psycho-behavioural skillset to cope, or where the pressures were prolonged and uncontrollable, the inherent lack of safety was a significant risk factor for the player's overall development.

#### *3.3. Tough Love*

In seeking to understand what approaches players considered to be the most effective in supporting their development, two themes were developed as prominent features of their experience. The first theme, coaches use of 'harder' approaches in their coaching practice, concerned holding players accountable to high standards, giving them role clarity, engaging in robust feedback processes and attention to detail. The second generated theme included the 'softer' approaches used by coaches in offering the player a level of openness and care. Perhaps summarising the needs that players perceived they had throughout the early stages of their careers, player three (S3) noted: 'I've worked with so many good coaches, we always had good conversations. They know when someone needs an arm on the shoulder or know when they need a kick up the a\*se'. The reflections of players were complex and multidimensional; players believed that they derived important but differential benefits from different coaching behaviours. This didn't appear to be a balance between hard and soft approaches. Instead, players perceived coaches as offering more of one or the other through to offering both simultaneously. Across the interviews, both groups frequently used the term 'tough love' to describe what they perceived to be the most enabling coaching approach. Players consistently reflected on their desire and the necessity for the coach to adopt 'hard' approaches (tough) and the need for 'softer' approaches (love).

Table 2 presents the data based on player perception, identifying the approaches used by coaches that they perceived to be enabling of their future progress and the opposite pole [62], perceived to be disenabling. The perspectives of the players suggest a nondichotomous perspective on effective coaching. Players strongly believed that effectiveness was the result of both 'harder' and 'softer' approaches to coaching practice. In short, players strongly desired highly competent coaches who presented them with a clear direction and held them to high standards, whilst also caring for and about them.
