Looking across school playing fields where several matches are in progress at the same time can be a heart warming sight, and one that can make all the efforts required to make it happen feel worthwhile. However, closer examination of the scene often leads to the uncomfortable feeling that this isn’t what it is supposed to look like. Too many playing fields have populations of parents and coaches shouting, commenting and barking in a tone that conveys frequent frustration, occasional anger and unfortunate observations aimed at both players and officials. In some schools, there is a cultural expectation that the role of a coach during the game is to shout at the players pretty much incessantly, and that the place of parents is to maintain a stream of technical advice to players and referees.
Many individual schools have recognized this discomfort and attempted to address the situation with codes of conduct. In 1998, HMC produced a Code of Conduct for Coaches and Parents, which remains substantially unchanged to this day. It is regularly distributed, though much more infrequently observed. Many youth leagues have tried similar initiatives – all intended to make the sports environment more enjoyable for all involved. Despite all this, many games still have a sour atmosphere, with criticism and recrimination at varying levels of intensity. Few are the schools who can’t contribute to the parent horror story conversations.
Why don’t these Codes of Conduct change the tone of children’s sport? Why is the letter of the law observed, but not the spirit? They can create a framework of parent behaviour which is reluctantly observed, and whose boundaries are frequently pushed. At best, they can promote changes that are superficial and cosmetic.
Codes of Conduct don’t educate parents why some types of touchline behavior are better for the players. They don’t explain the difference between a parent trying to be the coach of their child, and being a supporter; they don’t explain that parents can enjoy the excitement of their child’s competition without undermining it. Without getting lost in the emotion of the occasion, and suspending all good sense and self discipline. They don’t explain the significance of parents and coaches as role models for children, or clarify the difference between a developmental environment and a gladiatorial one, such as might be experienced in professional sport. In trying to protect children from failure, there is often a culture of blame, in which the referee and the opposition are easy targets. In short, externally imposed codes don’t impact on parental (and coach) understanding and motivation. Excesses may be curbed, but hearts and minds are rarely won. Followers of school sport are not good at saying (and believing),“That was a fantastic game, and you were better than us today. Well done.”
Is it inevitable? Schools can do more to educate players and spectators of why it is preferable to have positive and supportive touchline behavior. They can focus on the benefits for the players, and attempt to build a culture of pride amongst parents that, regardless of how the opposition behave, they will model self discipline and good example, in order to contribute to their child’s enjoyment of the occasion. Children stay involved in sports if they are fun. Extensive research is quite consistent in that conclusion. Parents and teachers have a major impact on how much fun it is on game day, and whether competition is thrilling or terrifying. It is too important a factor to be left to parents to make up themselves as they go along.
