Where's the line ?

[default]

Reading some of the posts over the last couple of weeks a question is nagging at me. Thetruth brought up a great point about a players game "IQ" I'll agree some players have and some don't. And that can be said at any level of play. SOOO where is the line drawn when it comes down to a player taking it upon herself to make a play that she knows to be the right play but the coach wants something else done. I know that every hit and every play is different in certain situations and that there really is not a right way or a wrong way to play out different situations. Wow does that really make any sense?? IE- 0 or 1 out base runner at at 3rd - no one on 2nd - runner does not have to leave - ground ball hit to 3rd baseman ( easy to say ball should be fielded and and make easy out at 1st ) - but run would score. Coaches theory get the easy out. Now - What if the 3 rd baseman fields ball - pumps throw - holds onto ball and tags base runner out leaving the base for home. Coach did not have that defense called, no one knew that it was going to happen - 3rd baseman made an intelligent ( IQ ) decision to get the lead runner out to keep the base runner from scoring and get the out. If this works the player is a hero - if not for some reason the coach chastises the player for not doing what he expects to be done by his players. Whos right and whos wrong? Does the player keep making decisions and start to look like a show off to the rest of the team or does the player sink in with the what the coach wants things to be done and play defense safe? Where does that line of respect for the coach fall?? I'm really curious to see what the responses will be. I know that there are a lot of team coaches that read these posts - I really would like to get an opinion from a coach as to what he would like to see out of his " gifted" players.

 

[default]

you answered the question with your example. if no one else knows what is going to happen the TEAM can't be ready. and if she throws it home and the catcher isn't ready, or if the ss isn't covering 3rd and the runner is safe at both places... you missed an easy out.

I coach some very intelligent, in fact gifted 15-16 year olds. Their IQ comes from playing together and understanding each other's limits. It comes from knowing the right time to do something and it comes from trusting the coach to put them in the best position to be successful. A player should come to the coach and say hey - I was thinken what if I did this.... and then we try that the next time when everyone knows what is going on.

I'm not saying they shouldn't think for themselves. But in a team game - and during a coach called play - executing leads to success.

 

[default]

Just my observations. ?Some coaches try to structure the game to fit into a neat series of signs or designed plays. ?I admit I have some designed plays but it is tempered with instructions to follow your instincts if you see something developing that was not expected. ?Structure is not bad, but too much structure is not good.

To the point that was discussed. ?Some players have a higher IQ when it comes to the game than others. ?So what is a coach suppose to do, especially with a younger team. ?I guess my answer is to teach, not just coach. ?Pull up a bucket and have a session with the team. Give the team a scenerio. ?For example, ask the question "One out, bottom of the 7th, runner at third, our team is up by one and the opponents are up at bat." ?Ask questions like, "There is a long foul ball that the left fielder can catch, what should the left fielder do?" ?Let the team discuss this. ?Introduce different questions with the same situation. ?If the players are to be a student of the game, there has to be a teacher somewhere.

Challenge them to watch softball on Big 10 or baseball on STO and to bring their observations to the next practice. Give a copy of the ASA umpires tests to the girls and have them do an open book exam on the test and bring it to practice. OK, enough.

 

[default]

What if the coach himself makes it even more confusing? DD playing third over the weekend. Runner on third with less that two outs. She fields a grounder hit to her, probably has a chance at the plate, but goes to first for the out as the run scores. Coach yells from the dugout to check the runner next time and make the play at the plate if it is there. Couple of innings later, same thing. DD goes to first for the out, run scores, and coach yells from the dugout again. Alright, here I can say she probably should have tried for the play at the plate after the earlier "advice". Two innings later there are runners on first and third. Runner on first breaks with the pitch and stops half way to second. Catcher fires it back to the pitcher and the pitcher begins to go after the runner between first and second. Coach yells "Get the out, get the out!" (as in work the rundown and get that runner out) as the runner from third basically jogs home and scores. Now does the coach want to allow the runs to score or doesn't he? The game was basically in hand very early as we were down by quite a few. :-?

 

[default]

Johnnies makes an excellent point about teaching. If you teach the kids to run all the possibilities for the next play through their minds before the ball is hit, they'll start doing the right thing instinctively. I'd say Viper's daughter has been programmed to stifle her own creativity. Otherwise, she would check the runner, and if it looks to her like the runner is bracing to bolt for the plate when she throws it to first--- then she'd make a full fake throw and spin on her left foot and tag the runner or flip it to the catcher for an easy tag.

The catcher, because she has instinct, is well-coached and has nothing else to do with a runner on third and less than two out, will be standing in front of the plate ready for a throw. The first baseman will be watching the runner at third as well. If the third baseman looks the runner back and throws to first and the runner bolts for home--- the first baseman will come off the bag to meet the throw and make a quick throw home to cut down the runner. If she waits to record the out at first before throwing home, then she knows it will be too late. (Obviously, the game is close and the run scoring from third would mean something).

These types of plays become routine after they're practiced. Good coaches, good teams make sure they work on these plays because they're the ones that can win or lose games. To that end, when I run the infielders through situation drills, I always ask each fielder what she's going to do if the ball is hit to her. The only acceptable answer for me is, "I don't know yet." Here's an example of why-- using the third baseman as the player to whom the ball is hit:

Runners at first and second. One out. Ball is hit to the left of the third baseman on one hop. She spears it. She tags the runner from second and throws to second for a double play. Same situation, the ball is hit hard right at the third baseman. She is playing up for the bunt. She fields it, makes a strong throw to second and the second baseman turns the double play. Same situation. Ball is hit hard down the line. Third baseman backhands the ball and scrambles to third in time for a force out. Same situation. Ball is hit slowly toward third. Third baseman charges it, bare hands it and throws to first for an out.

Those are four different decision options for the third baseman in the same game situation. Each was the correct play to make based on where and how hard the ball was hit. That's why the only answer the third baseman could possibly have given when the coach asked before the ball was hit, "where's the play if it's hit to you?" was "I don't know yet." I also encourage the player to ask me: "What's the score? What inning?" As long as she knows all the options and has practiced them or used them in games, the player will instinctively do the right thing when the time comes.

The bottom line is that if your players know what they're doing, then "coach called plays" become mostly unnecessary. Sure, you tell them to play in with a runner at third and less than two out, but you have to let them decide, based on the runner's foot speed, how hard the ball is hit and whether they had to move left or right to field it, whether to throw home or to first.

Prepare them well and they'll perform well. Coach less. Teach more.

 

[default]

If a girl follows good instincts and eleminates the scoring threat then she is in my opinion elevating her game and should be commended. Becoming a better and smarter player can't be faulted but unfortunatly there are coaches who don't see it that way and you'd be better off disobeying Hitler than one of these clowns.

 

[default]

I never get on a player for making a bad decision. Making bad decisions is part of the game, and certainly part of the learning curve. I take care of those situations in practice. I go nuts when they do not know what to do with it when they get it. I get on the team when they are not communicating with their teammates. I go crazy when they miss signs , or aren't paying attention on the bases.

 

[default]

Players need to know they can make decisions based on their instincts. If everything is w/in a structured environment, it makes it harder for the player to develope. There has to be a foundation of fundementals, but not just a right or wrong decision. If the reigns aren't to tight, the girls will have a chance to succeed and gain confidence or fail and learn from their mistakes.
Here's a great way to sum up - a quote from Teddy Roosevelt. "The credit belongs to the person who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotion, and who spends themself in a worthy cause, and if he fails, @ least fails while daring greatly, so that he'll never be with those cold and timid souls who never know either victory or defeat."

 

[default]

DD playing third over the weekend. ?Runner on third with less that two outs. ?She fields a grounder hit to her, probably has a chance at the plate, but goes to first for the out as the run scores. Coach yells from the dugout to check the runner next time and make the play at the plate if it is there.

It's been awhile since I coached, but I always hated it when a coach yells at his player after a play. Usually the yelling is more to cover up their own shortcomings or appease their own ego.

If this is such a great coach why didn't he either: Cover this in practice so his players know what to expect, or; Yell out to them BEFORE the play to let them know what he expects?

I always tried to stress to my players that on many plays, there is no "one-size-fits-all" reaction. You will often have several options, depending on the game situation, where and how the ball is hit and how the runners react. I would also try to get the point across to them that, in "real time" game situations you might only have a split second to make your decision, so you really need to run through all the possible options in your head before the ball is even pitched.

We would cover this stuff in practice. During the games, if I was doing my job, in these situations I would remind my players of their options BEFORE the play happens. You hope that, after enough instruction, repetitions and real game situations, that the players begin to develop their own "softball sense" about these kinds of things.

 

[default]

Players need to know they can make decisions based on their instincts. If everything is w/in a structured environment, it makes it harder for the player to develope. There has to be a foundation of fundementals, but not just a right or wrong decision. If the reigns aren't to tight, the girls will have a chance to succeed and gain confidence or fail and learn from their mistakes.
Here's a great way to sum up - a quote from Teddy Roosevelt. "The credit belongs to the person who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotion, and who spends themself in a worthy cause, and if he fails, @ least fails while daring greatly, so that he'll never be with those cold and timid souls who never know either victory or defeat."

Excellent post, vstormmerle---I agree, I think the reins need to be a little loose, so that the girls aren't too afraid to make the plays or show a little independence (similar to the micromanaging thread). ?

Have seen teams that are practically paralyzed by a coach who critiques each swing of the bat, each play made, out-loud and ?during the game.

If a good play or out is made, hitter connects well with the ball, any tepid compliment is immediately snatched back with a "but you should have done this"---very demoralizing to the girls and they soon are afraid to play at all. ? :-/

 

[default]

There's really no way a coach can remember all the things he sees during a game that might need to be addressed later. I really find it helpful to take some notes during games.

Examples:

1. Jenny needs to start out deeper at second base with no one on first so she can cover more ground.

2. Infielders need to pay attention to the runner at first and holler "going!" if she steals, so the catcher is aware.

3. Mary is dropping her hands at the plate before she starts her swing.

It's good to remind players of these things during the game as well, but the older they get-- the less you're going to be able to correct things without a lot of repetition during a practice.

 

[default]

That is so true. I have coached 18u and now 13U. The older they get the more you can sit back and watch. The younger...the more you have to teach.

 

[default]

If a coach has their expectations and guidelines rigid and narrow then not only will a girl not make the best play, she may turn into a "hesitator" where she may have to think too long on if she's doing it exactly the way coach wants and even an extra second can cost you getting the out.