Mentally Tougher - The Condor Performance Blog

NRL Round 10 – Canberra vs Parramatta

This match was chosen for analysis for all the wrong reasons. If there was a match that showcased what not to do from the mental perspective, this game is it. Both teams played like teams desperately trying not to lose.

How is it possible for 8 tries to be scored in the final 23 minutes of an NRL match, especially when no tries were scored in the prior 17 minutes of the 2nd half? That is a strike rate of 1 try every 3 minutes.

The second half played out like a cross between a game of 50 over cricket (nothing happening from overs 21 to 40) and basketball (we score, you score). For 17 minutes nothing happened (Cricket) then the Eels finally score and the 3-minute-try-clock kicks in (Basketball).

Both coaches came out with the usual comments about ‘needing to play for 80 minutes’, ‘taking ownership of our performance’, ‘feeling frustrated and disappointed’, and ‘having an idea about what we need to work on this week’. What do these words really mean? What does a player do to demonstrate ‘ownership’? What does a coach do turn it around?

Rather than go through the match blow-by-blow and embarrass each team for their mental vulnerabilities I’ll focus on what you as a coach need to do to turn things around if your team ever finds itself in the position that the Raiders and Eels occupied this round.

Here is a list of what needs to be addressed mentally:

• Attitude • Concentration and attention • Managing nerves and emotions

Attitude is often used to describe defence; ‘defence is an attitude’. This sounds great but what does it actually mean and what do you do to demonstrate this attitude?

The answer is found in line speed, contact and communication (decision making).

All of these need to be working for ‘attitude’ to be present in defence. This is what you measure in this area to rate your teams attitude and you coach these by developing drills that test these skills under fatigue and pressure.

Many coaches know what drills to use to coach line speed, contact and communication, however, are they really coaching these skills in an environment that will mean that these skills stand up under pressure?

Quite often when I visit rugby league ovals and see teams being coached my answer to this question is no – the environment that line speed, contact and communication are coached within do not adequately prepare players to execute these skills under pressure. My job is to help the coach fix that.

Next up is concentration and attention. ‘We need to concentrate for 80 minutes’ or ‘Concentrate!’ are often spoken (or yelled) by coaches. Great; what does a player do to show they are in fact concentrating? How does a coach even know that concentration is the issue?

Here’s an example of concentrating. While you are reading this you are not focusing on your lower back or on your big toe on your left foot. Now that I have drawn your attention to your lower back and your big toe on your left foot I’ll give you an instruction: CONCENTRATE!

What I have left out is the key element – what I want you to concentrate on exactly. So, where is your concentration at now? Add fatigue and match pressure and my ‘concentrate’ instruction is useless. As a coach you need to specify exactly what you want your players to concentrate on!

Then you need to be able to coach it (via drills and exercises) and measure it, otherwise how on earth do you know if the players are getting any better at it?

Both the Raiders and Eels displayed terrible concentration and attention skills; I’d love to know how each coach is going to address this.

Finally, managing nerves and emotions. If you want to see a group of NRL players under emotional stress have a close look at the Parramatta players after a try is scored against them. Frustration, disbelief, anger, shock are observable in their facial expressions. If you can lip read four letter words you know what they are saying as well.

Humans don’t perform at their best when they feel this way. So the options are, stop the feelings from happening (very hard) or get good at managing them on the field. After a try is scored your players have 60-90 seconds to manage their emotions before they restart play. That is a very short turnaround to manage the emotions of frustration, anger, disbelief and shock.

How much time do your players spend each week on drills for managing their emotions? My guess is zero. Yet, rugby league demands players have the ability to manage their emotions in 60 – 90 seconds (after a try is scored) or as little as 5 - 10 seconds after a bad decision from a referee. This mental skill is simply not coached. I encourage coaches to find out how to coach it or get someone in to coach it for you.

Regarding nerves; this is the reason behind players looking like they are putting all their effort into avoiding a loss. Just like emotions, rugby league requires that players know how to manage their nerves in order to perform at their best. So, how much time do rugby league players spend each week on drills or exercises to manage their nerves? My guess is zero.

Players will experience nerves before and during every game of rugby league, so why on earth are they not practicing managing them? The reason is lack of expertise in the mental area of performance; there is no other explanation.

So, in short, coaches who investigate how to implement the above mental skills into their coaching will be in a better position to make a career out of coaching and possibly even fill one of the next wave of NRL head coaching positions vacant.

NRL Round 9 – South Sydney vs Cronulla

The Monday night game for this round involved two teams who have made significant improvements in their performance this year, so it is fitting that their clash be the subject of this rounds analysis.

Some astute recruiting has strengthened the roster at Cronulla this year. When quality players are combined with the competitive attitude displayed by the Sharks over the last couple of seasons it makes a solid recipe for the success they are experiencing this year.

The Sharks no longer have trouble scoring points and their competitive attitude keeps them in the contest right up to the 80th minute, which is how this match against South Sydney panned out.

Mental Strengths for Cronulla:

• Despite conceding the opening try of the match and being starved of possession, they were able to hit back and force the momentum of the game to turn their way • Kept turning up in defence, even after poor referee decisions and goal line pressure from Souths’ big forwards. Jeff Robson was outstanding during one defensive set as he but his body in front of much larger men who were steaming onto the ball from 10 metres out • Continued to create opportunities despite some errors being made out wide when it came to finishing plays off • Played with intensity regardless of the scoreline or the clock

Mental Vulnerabilities for Cronulla:

• An intercept try and two penalty goals were the difference between the two teams • Pulling the reins in on Paul Gallan. He has singlehandedly carried this team in the past and has performed some superhuman feats by playing 80 minutes as a prop, plus the job of some of his team mates. The down side of this is potential over-involvement from him now – he actually needs to do less and focus on his job because there are players within the team now who can create opportunities. Gallan doesn’t need to do everything anymore and his stand out errors reflect his over involvement (intercept pass for a Souths try; dropped a kick off in goal; took off from dummy half on the last tackle while on Souths’ line and threw a pressure pass to a player not expecting it) • Errors from wingers and centres when plays were there to be finished with a try

South Sydney Mental Strengths:

• A new coach put a stop to talk of winning the comp in February, which prior coaches have been unable to do • They stayed in the contest and were able to continue to push ahead on the scoreboard when Cronulla hit back • They maintained their intensity in attack and defence for the full 80 minutes and had a completion rate of over 90% • Some individual players are finding form and producing some consistency each week • They responded well to poor referee decisions and did not panic towards the end of the game when they needed to close it out, which they have not done in the past

South Sydney Mental Vulnerabilities

• Some defensive decision making let them down and made the contest closer than the possession stats and completion rate stats would have indicated • A lack of discipline when in possession of the ball cost them a penalty, which is almost unheard of in the NRL

This was an entertaining game to watch and although both coaches will be upset with the points their team conceded, the fans were treated to an open and fast paced match with both teams scoring five tries.

Mentally, both teams are moving in the right direction.

NRL Round 8 – Rooster v Dragons

The events at the end of this match make it a stand out for review this week, especially in light of the fact that this is not the first time this season that a seemingly impossible come-back win has eventuated.

Here’s how the mental element of performance produces these results, and will continue to do so.

As a game draws to a close everyone (players, spectators, commentators, coaches; any human watching with interest) will make a calculation that involves two key elements; the score and time remaining. Some will make this calculation after building a significant half time lead, or after scoring plenty of points early in a match.

Spectators will often leave the ground as a result of their answer to this calculation (presumably to get an early start on the blogs that are calling for the heads of the coach, players and anyone else responsible for the loss).

Commentators will start to sing the praises of the team in front and often talk up the hopes of the opposition, usually as part of their job description to keep the viewing audience interested in the contest so they watch it to the end (thereby seeing all the advertising).

Coaches will have thoughts and views about the likely outcome of the game and may have some interchange decisions to make and messages to send out to the players.

For mentally tough players, none of this makes any difference because they know their job and they know what the task at hand is; how they do their job is the difference between winning and losing.

The Roosters showed visible signs of mental vulnerability and they have showed these signs in the past (see Round 2, 2011 on our facebook page). The Dragons also displayed some signs of mental vulnerability; however, there was a significant factor in their favour – Ben Hornby.

Here’s how the events unfolded.

• Jamie Soward blows up at the referee regarding a line-drop out decision and concedes a penalty right in front, 10 metres out for back chat (poor emotion management producing a loss of discipline) • Roosters kick the penalty goal and lead 24-16 with 4 minutes remaining (most are thinking ‘game-set-match’ Roosters, but no one can predict the future!) • Post-match player interviews reveal that Ben Hornby’s message behind the goal line is ‘We are still in this’ and given it’s his day, due to breaking the club record for most appearances, his troops ‘buy in’ and follow their leader • The Dragons successfully regain possession off a short kick off and score on the same play (Roosters display a lack of urgency, a lack of awareness and poor execution in securing possession and defending the play because they thought they had an 8 point buffer and could get away with it – ‘surely the Dragons can’t score twice in 4 minutes’) • Dragons convert and are still alive at 22-24 with 2 minutes remaining (time for only 2 sets of six; ‘surely we can defend one set of 6’)

What happened next reveals the mindset adopted by the Roosters, possibly not collectively, but at least by their skipper, Braith Anasta - go slow.

With such little time remaining the temptation is to kill time by crawling back to halfway and reduce the opposition to only 1 set of six tackles to go the length of the field. Tie up boot laces, pull socks up, throw grass into air to check breeze and so on.

The mental difficulty of this mindset is maintaining intensity when competing at a ‘walk through’ pace. In fact, the ‘go slow’ is the ideal way to avoid competing! Yes, that’s right – going slow screams ‘I DON”T WANT TO COMPETE’ followed by a softer ‘because we’ve got it won anyway’.

So, with the avoidance of competing on their mind, Anasta stands in the centre of the field and prepares for the re-start. Now given that Anasta has been prone to kick the ball out on the full from the restart in the past, he does the 2nd worst thing he could possibly do (from the mental perspective). He performs a slow and exaggerated kick-off to punctuate the avoidance of competing.

Specifically, Anasta points to his left and right, takes a few steps back, composes himself, raises his hand in the air, then kicks off. Phew, it didn’t go out, despite the fact that this sort of break from his usual routine prior to a kick off increases the risk of error.

When the surge of energy that the previous try provided the Dragons is matched with the slow and flat energy levels displayed by the Roosters you get the exact ingredients for a one sided walk over.

Think about it; one team highly charged, full of intensity with nothing to lose and another team desperate to avoid competing, going slow, thinking they have it won or hoping not to lose it from here.

• The Dragons receive the ball and go the length of the field, not to score, but to earn a repeat set • Anasta again slows down the restart, this time taking longer with the line drop out than he did with the previous kick off – ‘Hey Dragons, did I mention WE DON’T WANT TO COMPETE’ was written all over his effort. • The Roosters markers must have had concrete shoes – they didn’t compete while they were standing still on the last few plays prior to the match winning try. Meanwhile, the Dragon’s dummy half bursts out towards the ‘A’ and ‘B’ defenders, creating some attacking options, applies pressure by running at pace and with intensity. • Dragons score. All over red rover.

So, post-match interviews are conducted with players who are either shattered or singing the benefits of never giving up; guess which players were which.

Surprisingly, no media commentators mentioned the word choke (which it was), maybe because that would take away from the Dragon’s fine performance.

The loss occurred in the minds of the Roosters and despite comments from Brian Smith that they haven’t practiced short kick offs for a while, practice won’t be enough.

The players already know how to defend it. They let themselves down mentally.

NRL Round 7 – Manly v Gold Coast

‘I didn’t see it coming’ were the words Geoff Toovey used regarding Manly’s 1st loss at Brookvale in 12 games. This is not true; here’s why.

During the week’s media commitments Toovey labelled this round’s clash with the Titans as a ‘danger game’, plus he was aware that Manly would only have a 5 day turnaround from their Monday night performance against the Panthers. So he did see it coming. Coaches say they ‘didn’t see it coming’ when they don’t know why it happened. ‘It’ of course refers to a poor performance. Here’s how the mental element contributed to how Manly produced a poor performance all by themselves.

What is a danger game? Is it a game that is played on a field with land mines in it, so you lose a leg if you step on one, or is it a game that has a greater risk of physical injury?

When Jack Nicholson’s character is asked about danger in the movie A Few Good Men the exchange goes like this:

Tom Cruise: “He was in mortal danger?” Jack Nicholson: “Is there any other kind?”

It is ridiculous to label a game of football, or a game of anything for that matter, as a danger game. There is no real danger, only perceived danger, which is why such a label is mentally destructive. The worst outcome for a team in any game is a loss; where is the danger in that?

The same applies for must-win games, crunch-games, games against bogey teams; all of these are complete rubbish because they are all mentally destructive.

A must-win game suggests that winning is optional for the other games.

A crunch-game suggests that this game is more important than all the others (which it’s not; all games require the same skills be executed, so making some games more important only increases pressure, reduces performance and produces losses).

A bogey team suggests a mental obstacle that a certain team provides, which only exists in the minds of those who choose to believe it.

Coaches make the mistake of labelling these games in an often misguided attempt to motivate their team. If the coach believes that his team needs extra motivation, it would be a good idea for the coach to do it properly and add something that was actually going to increase his teams’ motivation. All ‘danger game’ labels increase is pressure and guess what, pressure leads to poor performance.

This is why danger-games and so on are self-fulfilling. The seed of poor performance is planted into the heads of the players who take on these rubbish labels and beliefs.

Coaches often get the relationship between motivation and nervous energy wrong. If you think your team needs motivating, ask yourself why?

Have NSW lost so many State of Origin series because they aren’t motivated? Do they really need to be told how important the series is? The role of the coach is to manage this balance and the more the coach understands the influence of the mental element the better they are at getting this balance right.

Perhaps Manly were mentally and physically flat following a Monday night game. If so, this means you load up on rest and relaxation so they can produce the required burst of energy on game day, especially given a 5 day turnaround. If you are physically flat and then get a rev up from the coach, you start burning mental energy before it’s required, leaving little for game day.

The extra emotion added by a senior player’s 200th game tips the scales over and the balance between motivation (too much) and nervous energy (too much) is disturbed.

Toovey then plants another rotten seed during the week; he reminds his players about the Parramata game as an example of what happened when they are ‘supposed to win’. What was he thinking?

This is like reminding someone about a car crash they recently had before they get in the car. How would you feel about being driving if that was you? For most people, it will increase their nerves (pressure) and reduce their performance – exactly where they need to be to have another crash!

Again, coaches make this error in a misguided attempt to motivate their players to avoid repeating their mistake. This is basic psychology – as a coach you need to focus your players on what you want them to do, instead of what you want them to avoid.

For example, don’t think about ice cream. Whatever you do, don’t think about ice-cream because it’s very dangerous. We have to avoid ice-cream at all costs, especially this weekend because it’s so much more important that we avoid ice-cream. Are you confused by this?

It is very hard to read ‘ice-cream’ 4 times in 20 seconds without thinking about it, even though I said ‘don’t’ and I told you how dangerous it is!

Same applies for errors, penalties, missed tackles and dropped ball. If you don’t want those things to happen then you need to say what you do want (completions, discipline, solid contact and soft hands). Say these things at training and say them often. This forms the habit of directing your player’s attention to what they need to produce, which builds consistency.

This is why the half-time talk is so important from the mental perspective; coaches can really kill their teams’ chances by saying the wrong things.

So, Manly regularly drop the ball (I bet the call ‘no dropped ball’ could be heard in Beacon Hill), miss tackles, concede penalties and produce a flat performance.

From the mental perspective, you could see it coming a mile away.

NRL Round 6: Wests Tigers v Brisbane

This rounds analysis had to focus on the Tigers as there have been a number of mental elements at work over the first 6 rounds.

Firstly, let’s discuss expectations, both from inside the club and outside the club. We have already mentioned the expectations of the Titans (see round 2) this season and the Tigers are no different from any other NRL club; they all have expectations about what the season will bring.

Mentally this type of thinking is referred to as crystal ball gazing or fortune telling. Clubs who lose grand finals or miss out on grand finals will often indulge in this sort of thinking by using statements like ‘one step further this year’ and so on.

The thought ‘one step further this year’ assumes the performance of last season is locked in for this season, except for the small changes needed to improve. It also assumes that every other team’s performance will remain the same. Both of these assumptions never happen; there are far too many variables involved. Hence, every club has a clean slate every season; thinking otherwise means falling into this trap and anyone claiming to win the comp in February is a goose (think Souths circa 2010 and 2011; notice the difference this year).

This brings me to those outside the club; specifically, the media, betting agencies and fans. The media’s business is to sell the game to the fans by telling stories and building expectations. The betting agencies are in the business of increasing turnover (to guarantee their profits) by playing on the fans’ expectations and the fans are in the business of telling the club how to do their job and expressing their delight and disappointment with their team’s fortunes during the season.

The Tigers have suffered by being installed as premiership favourites before the kick-off to the season even occurred. This lofty expectation becomes the unrealistic benchmark their performance is judged by and not meeting that expectation is harshly dealt with by the media (those responsible for building it up in the first place). Hence, stories like the Tigers are soft; that there is unrest within the group and so on. All of it is garbage. They are simply a football side adjusting to a new roster, just like everybody else.

When you are an expert commentator and your expert opinion turns out to be incorrect, your job description says you smash those responsible for you getting it wrong, which in this case are the players in the team you poorly judged. Experts won’t come out and say ‘I got it wrong. I misjudged them.’

Now let’s look at the on field performance of the Tigers this round, which clearly demonstrated the effort, desire and commitment of the group to put another ‘W’ on the board. Against quality opposition, the Tigers let themselves down through a small period of time in the 1st half, which can only be put down as a mental lapse.

Poor skill execution is often viewed as a technical flaw; it’s not. The origins of poor skill execution are mental – concentration, attention, confidence, pressure, nerves and so on. Desperation to score leads to pushing passes under pressure, its opposite is showing patience and composure when opportunities present themselves. Snatching at opportunities shows a lack of confidence in creating more opportunities in the future, hence the perceived need to convert this opportunity right now.

The Tigers were so close to converting an opportunity of their own, giving them a lead they desperately needed to build their confidence so they could play from in front. When it didn’t happen, Brisbane was good enough to score.

What happens next is a reliable sign of a team’s mental toughness because they have to overcome the disappointment of what just happened in 90 seconds. This mental task becomes harder if players believe there was an injustice that they suffered from the referees (ie the opposition were offside).

By letting a high ball bounce at the end of the next Brisbane set, through lack of communication, the Tigers allowed Brisbane to score again immediately. Now we have compounded an error with another error. Beau Ryan’s reaction shows a glimpse of the emotions the Tigers would have been experiencing behind their goal line during the conversion attempt. How would Tim Moltzen be feeling knowing his name has just been put under Ben Barba’s on the list of fullbacks shaky under the high ball?

Managing emotions, confidence and concentration are all key mental skills required to stop the slippery slope of poor performance. Cheers from the crowd when Moltzen successfully fields a kick, only to lose it in the play the ball, serve to increase the difficulty of the mental task at hand; maintain composure and perform well.

The Tigers do go on to regain their composure, however the damage has already been done. Their commitment to stick at it right up to the final minute is a good sign. They are dangerous with the ball in hand, however, consolation tries are easier to score than match winning tries (less pressure to execute).

So how do the Tigers turn things around?

The Tigers have the players and the skills; they just need to execute them for 80 minutes, which is easier said than done.

The Tigers’ style is built around the players backing themselves, which means taking on risk, such as shifting the ball in their own 20 and so on. This requires a number of mental factors to be stable (confidence, nerves, attention, concentration, mood and so on), which is not the case for the Tigers at present.

So, they have two options: work on their mental skills and keep the way they play the same, or, change the way they play (less risk) to reduce the demand on their mental skills.

For example, currently the Tigers will shift the ball from a penalty restart from the left edge to the right edge using a play that involves two decoy runners. The 30-odd metre lateral movement (multiple passes; more risk) often doesn’t involve them moving the ball forwards, as most teams do with a one-out hit up (one pass; low risk). Subsequent shift plays are then run at a defence that isn’t on the back foot, hence, increasing the pressure on the Tigers and undermining their skill execution.

For teams who are short in confidence (or not executing skills on game day), reducing the number of attacking options helps build some certainty in their play, which in turn builds confidence. As their confidence builds, the attacking options can be expanded again. Just because the ball is received in ‘good ball’ territory (outside a team’s 30 metre line) it doesn’t mean a yardage set can’t be played (a ball received inside the 30 metre line).

This is how you manage the balance between the technical and mental elements. More compact, but direct plays will help the Tigers build some momentum (and confidence), and then they can play their brand of ‘touch footy’; when the defence is under pressure instead of them.

To use Brian Smith’s words, some more time being ‘low on the shift’ might be just what the doctor ordered for the Tigers.

Every team is still in this competition; only 20 rounds to go!

Round 5: Parramatta v Manly

“Here we go again; Manly and Parra..”

Parramatta’s win this round means that every NRL team has now won a match, with only Melbourne yet to taste defeat this season. This provides me with an opportunity to dust off one of my favourite quotes regarding winning and losing in sport. It comes from an unlikely source; the female lead in the movie ‘White Men Can’t Jump’ and it goes like this:

“When you win, sometimes you actually lose; when you lose, sometimes you actually win; and sometimes when you win or lose, you actually tie.”

The message here is that there is more to winning and losing than meets the eye; especially from the mental perspective.

For example, the Tigers won in round 1, but their subsequent performances and results have actually been on the losing side of the ledger. This round they lost but their performance took a step in the right direction. The Titans are in the same boat. The opposite applies to Cronulla, who despite losing in round 1, actually ‘won’ in many ways, as reflected by their subsequent performances and results. Winning often covers up some of the cracks that get put under the microscope after a loss.

This is why I have selected to look at Parramatta’s performance this week. In fact, I have been waiting for Parramatta to win so I could write this analysis of them as they have been mentally poor for a number of seasons now and there is plenty to be learned by looking at why.

It’s easy to stick the boot into a side and throw coins when they are losing and it is amazing how positive the press become after a win. Many post-match articles are talking about this victory as a ‘season changing win’ despite Parramatta still being last on the ladder.

The reality is that they played well and they won one match of football; no more and no less.

The next challenge for the Eels is reproducing their performance; however not everything that happened this week can be reproduced.

For example, Nathan Hindmarsh can’t retire every week to help motivate them; Jarrod Hayne can’t come back from injury every week to ‘fist-pump’ them up and fans can’t throw coins or boo them off the field every match to add fuel to the motivational fire.

What will fill this gap for next round?

Despite Hayne receiving most of the headlines and the credit for the win, it was the improved performance across the team that produced the victory over Manly, even though the Eels still did their best to almost give the game away.

Nathan Hindmarsh put in his typical performance, yet this week the media are singing his praises, especially after ‘that hit’ on Brett Stewart with 20 minutes to go. Hindy makes those tackles every week, so why was his effort on Saturday night considered to be more special than any other week?

Why was Ben Roberts more threatening? Despite throwing a pass over the side line, Roberts laid on both the tries for Hayne to score.

Why was Fuifui Moimoi busting the line almost at will, albeit running through the smallest bloke in the opposition (Daly Cherry-Evans) on one of those occasions?

The word from Hayne himself was it all came down to attitude. Hence, the mental element is the spark that ignites performance; the missing piece in the puzzle of Parramatta’s inconsistent performance.

Producing consistent, quality performance is all about attitude and the Eels have been guilty of only producing it in patches.

Physically and technically Parramatta are a well trained and drilled football team and have been for years. You only have to look at the hi-tech instruments they are currently using in preparing their team physically and technically. Their sponsorship and partnership with the University of New England (Armidale) will only enhance their application of sport science.

The mental element of sport science is the area that has let Parramatta down over the past few seasons.

The ‘streak of ‘09’ was unable to be replicated in 2010, suggesting that no-one bothered to keep the recipe, if in fact a deliberate recipe for that success existed. I suspect it didn’t exist, based on the underwhelming 2010 performance.

A new coach brings in a new recipe for 2011 and the team hits a glass ceiling; unable to win close matches. Not just a couple but almost 10 close matches.

This is not a random occurrence that will be ‘character building’ (Kearney’s words; hinting at the ‘winning’ aspect of losing). In 2011 something systematic brought the Eels undone; they were psychologically lacking. Hence, the consistent close losses.

Specifically, in 2011, Eels’ media conferences were littered with comments that indicated mental errors were the catalyst for their close losses; on one occasion (I believe against the Roosters after leading 12-0) it was admitted that half the team wanted to defend the lead and the other half wanted to score more points. I think that game was lost 13-12.

Witnessing Nathan Hindmarsh throw his mouthguard into the ground after a close loss in 2011 is only character building IF the Eels know exactly what mental skills let them down AND how to correct them. This is the recipe the Eels need.

Without knowing what mental skills are required and how to develop and practice them, the Eels’ players will continue to be thrown in the deep end. If they continue to drown, it’s because they aren’t mentally skilled enough – meaning they lack the mental skills to be able to consistently perform.

New coaches don’t always bring those mental skills to the table; sometimes new players do and the rest of the playing group feed off that. The current view at the club is that the mental element is ok; the rest of the season will demonstrate whether this is true or not.

The content of Shayne’s Round-by-Round Analysis is the property of Condor Performance and can only be reused by getting permission from the author. He can be emailed at shayne@condorperformance.com

NRL Round 4: the 12 – nil round

3 matches this round featured the 12-nil scoreline either close to half time (Souths v Brisbane) or at half time (St.George v Manly; Canterbury v Newcastle) and 3 contrasting results occurred which are worthy of discussion from a mental perspective.

Souths v Brisbane

• Souths lead 6-0 after 9 minute and threaten to score back to back tries • Brisbane have a player sin binned (10 minute mark) somewhat controversially • Penalty goal to Souths pushes them out to 8-0 • Souths score again after 17 minutes, while Brisbane are down to 12 men; 12-0 • Souths don’t score again, which is odd given the burst of points in the 1st 20 mins and the many opportunities they have over the last 60 minutes. How and why does this happen? • Brisbane score in the corner in the 38th minute; 12-4 • The arm-wrestle continues for the first 12 mins of the 2nd half • Brisbane score and convert; 12-10 (54 minutes) • Brisbane take the lead 3 minutes later; 14-12 (57 minutes) • With 20 mins to go both sides are still in the contest • Brisbane score the match winner in the 73rd minute; 20-12 • Souths complete 70% of their sets: Brisbane 76%

St. George v Manly

• St George open the scoring after 4 mins with a very flat ball; 6-0 • Both sides arm wrestle up to the 35th minute when St George score again (from a controversial decision); 12-0 • Manly score in the 45th minute; 12-6 • Both sides arm-wrestle until the 76th minute when St George score the match winner; 16-6 • A field goal in the 79th minutes wraps up the 17-6 win for St George • All points in this game were scored in the first and last 5 mins of each half • Both sides had above 80% completion rates (St G – 87%; Manly 81%) • Manly lifted their intensity in defence a couple of time in the 2nd half in an attempt to gain some momentum, then score points to draw level; one set ended with St George receiving a relieving penalty due to a high shot (Lussick)

Canterbury v Newcastle

• Newcastle lead 6-0 after 8 minutes • This is extended to 12-0 after 19 minutes • Canterbury struggle to hold onto possession and apply any pressure • Half time score is 12-0 • Newcastle opt for a penalty goal in the 45th minute having not scored for 25 minutes. Canterbury now need to score 3 times to take the lead; 14-0 • A Newcastle try in the 72nd minute takes them out to 20-0 • Canterbury score a consolation try in the 78th minute; 20-6 • Canterbury complete 63% of their sets; Newcastle 81%

Summary

• Souths, St George and Newcastle all lead 12-0 at on stage this round; only Souths couldn’t convert this lead into win • Despite Newcastle converting their 12-0 advantage into a win, the poor performance of their opposition significantly contributed to this. I wouldn’t read too much into this game regarding mental toughness from Canterbury’s perspective; it is more likely to be an exception rather than a rule (just like St George’s match v Canterbury in round 2). How they turn up next week will be more relevant • St George held their nerve as front runners, despite scoring 1 less point than Manly in the second half; this was a quality game as Manly demonstrated their mental toughness by how they went about attempting to claw back a 12 point deficit • Brisbane also displayed their mental toughness. Similar to Manly, there was some controversy surrounding some decisions that resulted in the 12 point deficit they faced. Lesser teams would have sulked and turned their toes up; both Brisbane and Manly set about playing themselves back into the game and both were successful. Brisbane also ended up winning the match (bonus).

Lessons for coaches

• A 12-nil score line will tell you a great deal about the mental toughness of your team because 12 points is still within reach with 10 minutes to go; this means the longer the game goes, the more the tension and pressure builds. Mentally tough teams can hold their nerve for 80 minutes (or more if necessary); others can’t • When in front you are looking for your team to stay in the contest (maintain intensity in attack and defence; keep building pressure); mentally vulnerable teams will judge their opposition (as poor – ‘we have this covered’) and drop their intensity as they only want to do enough to win • When behind you are looking for the same thing! • St George, Brisbane and Manly showed their mental toughness. Newcastle and Canterbury are gradually building theirs. Souths have some more work to do as they have now lost twice (Roosters and Broncos) having been in front. • We are happy to answer any questions about how a coach goes about doing this work

NRL Round 3 – Gold Coast v Melbourne

Having been critical of a comment made by Titans coach John Cartwright in round 2, it seems only fair to address the Titans game this round, especially given that it against one of the mentally toughest teams in the competition.

• It rained for the entire match • Gold Coast concede a penalty in their 1st defensive set, putting Melbourne on the attack • Melbourne score on their 1st attacking set via a cross field kick (3rd minute) • Gold Coast lift their intensity in defence; some inspiring hits coming from Bodene Thompson (his hits resembled the Manly defence, who whack, rather than slowly cradle the tackled player to the ground) • Gold Coast put Melbourne under pressure with better field position and a solid completion rate (20/23 according to Billy Slater’s post-match comments) • No more points are scored in the 1st half! • Melbourne score and convert to go ahead 10-0 after 53 mins (Cartwright’s head drops) • 3 minutes later Melbourne score again; 14-0 after 56 minutes • Gold Coast cross the line for the first time after 60 minutes of football and are well and truly still in the contest with 18 minutes to go; 14-6 • A Melbourne set play at the ruck results in Slater crossing the line in the 65th minute • In a remarkable display of speed and athleticism, Slater scores again, this time off a dummy half kick from Smith
• Melbourne’s final try comes in the 75th minute

Gold Coast display some mental toughness

• Despite the try conceded in the first 3 minutes, the Gold Coast out-performed Melbourne during the 1st half due to minimal errors and better field position • This is exactly what their coach was looking for; building pressure through completing sets • They can take some genuine confidence out of this part of their performance as it was against quality opposition and under poor conditions (despite losing the match) • They stuck to their guns after going down 14-0 and put on a try of their own • They put themselves into a position to grind out a win with 18 minutes to go

Gold Coast mental vulnerabilities

• The first 3 minutes ended up being the difference in the 1st half, so their pre-game routine needs to be reviewed (or put together if they don’t have one that addresses the mental element of performance) • They held their nerve for 60 out of 80 minutes, then the flood gates opened • Try’s scored through the middle of the ruck (Slater’s 1st try) can be a sign of both physical and mental fatigue; I’m sure Gold Coast would have discussed this set piece from Melbourne – they just didn’t cover it when it came at them

Gold Coast Summary

• A much improved performance (completion rate, building pressure); it’s not as bad as it would seem given the score • Plenty of encouraging signs for the rest of the season if properly managed • Cartwright needs to take a leaf out of the Bennett or Hasler book of coaching; spend this year getting competitive (forget winning the comp) and increase the 60 minute effort of this match to 80 minutes. • Gold Coast will be mentally tough when they can start solidly; chase a 14-6 deficit by increasing their intensity in defence and stay in the arm-wrestle for as long as it takes (80 mins or more if it goes to golden point).

Melbourne’s mental toughness

• Another explosive start; scored a try after 135 seconds of play • Desperation in defence - able to keep their line intact through holding players up (over the line) and getting numbers to the ball carrier • Sticking to their game plan despite making some errors • Being patient; building sustained pressure for opportunities to crack the opposition in attack; maintaining solid defence despite giving away consecutive penalties • Decision making – selecting the right plays at the right time (for example hitting Gold Coast up the middle with a set play when the Gold Coast may have been on a high after scoring themselves) • Skill execution under poor conditions (Kick plays, set plays, diffusing bombs and so on)

Melbourne’s mental vulnerabilities

• Due to scoring so quickly they may be susceptible to taking more risk, which may explain some of their errors • They often appear not to know who is packing down at the scrum; whilst this looks like an orchestrated event designed to control the tempo of the game they may pay a big price (penalties) at some stage during the season (whilst teams can’t rush them at the scrum given the current laws, rushing Melbourne in other areas appears to be effective)

Melbourne Summary

• As previously stated (round 1), mentally very sound due to time spent practicing and executing their highly successful structure

Lessons for coaches

• You can build confidence in your players despite losing 30-6; the key is knowing how (ignore the results, build and maintain an attitude that reflects how you want to play, then deliver that attitude each week in practice and at games) • Bennett and Hasler start at their new clubs by keeping things simple; you don’t have to show your players how much you know about the game – you need to demonstrate that you can build confidence in your players, which will be repaid by their confidence in you

Due to Titans coach John Cartwright dropping a mental bombshell in the opening 45 seconds of the Titans media conference following their loss to the Raiders, this weeks’ analysis will focus on that because every coach on the planet stands to significantly benefit if they read, absorb and implement into their coaching the lessons these comments provide.

Here is the bombshell:

“When you look at your draw and you pick out the one’s you should win, it was one we definitely felt we should win, especially coming back from North Queensland with a win.”

Now the earth may not have moved for you when you read that comment; it massively moved for me when I heard it because these words go a long way to explain why the Titans went from top 4 in 2010 to wooden spoon in 2011.

There are so many things wrong with this statement from the mental perspective I could fill the next 24 rounds of reviews covering them. Instead I’ll give you a summary.

• No one can predict future results • Teams cannot even control the result of the game they are playing (I bet Souths thought they had control of the game v Roosters in round 1 with 3 minutes to go) • Forecasting is arrogant; it involves making negative judgements about opposition (If I was from Canberra I’d be offended to hear that the Titans felt it was a game they thought they ‘should’ win just by looking at the draw – it shows no respect for the opposition) • Forecasting shows an ignorance of the negative impact it has on the mental element of performance – which is the main reason why a team performs poorly (coaches will try and tell you it’s the referee or injuries that are to blame) • Who and what decides what matches ‘should’ be won? • By forecasting wins you are also forecasting losses, so John which teams do you plan to lose to? • ‘Should win’ or ‘must win’ games place unnecessary pressure on athletes and often are the significant factor behind subsequent poor performance • Teams that lack consistency often have these views (which is why they play well against teams they expect to lose against, but poorly against teams they expect to beat) • A win in the previous round (v North Queensland) has nothing to do with the following week’s result (if you disagree with this by saying that a win produces confidence to take into next week you are wrong)

Cartwright then goes on to explain the loss due to lack of repeat sets, low energy levels and a lack of urgency. All signs of a team who think they ‘should’ win this game; they are waiting for the opposition to play their role and lie down. Mentally, this is a big mistake; huge in fact.

“Even though we won last week we struggled to build any pressure with repeat sets and we did that again tonight. The difference tonight was that the Raiders held onto the ball.”

This is an admission that the Titans are not in control of their own performance; whether they win or lose depends on the performance of the opposition. The Cowboys gave the match away by dropping the ball and the Raiders took the game from them by completing their sets (just as they did the previous week v Melbourne). So, to beat the Titans, stay solid and complete your sets because they are currently unable to build pressure and put themselves into a position to win the match. This is what the Titans coach effectively just said!

Now the Titans 18-0 win in round 1 is cast in a very different light because it made the Titans look better than they really are. So how do the Titans get any genuine confidence out of this result when the Cowboys gave the match away rather than the Titans building pressure and winning it? The truth is they don’t.

What they get is a false confidence, believing what they did against the Cowboys is good enough to beat other teams. Maybe an NRL team with genuine title aspirations would have put 50 points on the board based on how poorly the Cowboys played. So the 18-0 result is a meaningless guide to confidence levels and form.

The Raiders took some genuine confidence (completing sets, fighting to get back into the match and so on) out of their loss against Melbourne (quality opposition who performed well), while the Titans were clutching at false confidence from their win (but below par performance) against the Cowboys (quality opposition who put in a significantly poor performance). Winning doesn’t always mean a confidence boost and losing doesn’t always produce a confidence drop!

The above points explain a large amount of the Titans drop from the top 4 in 2010 to the wooden spoon in 2012 (how may games ‘should’ they have won when they looked at the draw in 2011, especially coming of a top 4 finish in 2010?). The usual post-season review stating injuries, players leaving, bad calls during games and so on explained the 2011 performance for the Titans; there was no mention of how they reviewed their performance from the mental perspective or if it was even reviewed at all.

To cover the cracks that appeared in 2011, the Titans paraded their new signings to the media during pre-season in an attempt to fuel their premiership hopes for 2012. Clubs often think that new players will change the clubs fortunes, but every team gets new players! If the club is not on the right track from a mental perspective, new players will cover technical/positional deficiencies but have less of an impact on the overall team performance than expected. The Titans spent big, so now the pressure is on to deliver; mentally they don’t look to be able to handle the pressure so far.

From the mental perspective the prognosis for the Titans in 2012 is poor. New signings do not make up for the mental deficiencies reflected by the above comments and the impact they have on the on-field performances (as displayed by the Titans over the 2011 season and into the start of 2012). If the mental deficiencies (see above bullet points) are left alone, this season will follow a similar trajectory as 2011 – underachievement through inconsistent performances.

I wonder who else the Titan’s feel they ‘should’ beat in 2012?

Lessons for coaches:

• Focus on your own teams performance one week at a time • Ignore your opposition – get your own team ready as best as you can (you address you oppositions attack by focusing on your defence and vice versa) • Set realistic expectations for your players based on their skill level and effort levels rather than expecting them to win the comp • Each team has the same chance to win on any given day (50%) • Employ specialists in their respective fields; the mental element needs to be covered by a professional

Each week we will review the NRL games and select one game that provides the best example of a mental skill in operation during a game of rugby league. We will also provide examples of how rugby league coaches can build mental toughness in their players. Rugby league players and coaches of all levels can also benefit from these examples.

The reviews will be posted weekly for the duration of the 2012 rugby league season so players and coaches can add their comments and views on the mental skills covered.

Consider this as a 26 week course in mental toughness training for rugby league.

We look forward to having you on board in 2012.

NRL Round 1: Canberra v Melbourne

• Torrential rain for the entire match • Melbourne up 12-0 after 7 mins • Only 1 error (Canberra) after 20 mins • 6 errors by half time (5 for Melbourne; 1 for Canberra) • Canberra try disallowed just before half time; controversial decision • Canberra captain ‘wears his heart on his sleeve’ = emotional; regularly questioning referee who responded with ‘we saw it differently’, ‘we had a different view’. • Commentary (may or may not be true): Half time report from Canberra shed stated that coach and captain are ‘upset about the wrestling from Melbourne’ • Melbourne dominate field position at start of 2nd half • Melbourne score via two kick plays from Cronk; 18 - 12 • Canberra level in 59th minute; 18-all. • Canberra field goal to take lead for 1st time in 73rd minute • Campese error in 75th minute puts Melbourne on the attack • Melbourne score match winner in 77th minute • Post-match media conference: the no-try decision ‘changes the result of the game’. Even though this was brought up by a journalist fishing for a reaction, Furner’s reply says it all.

Canberra displayed a great deal of mental toughness:

• Digging in (lifting defence intensity) after going 12-0 down and completing their sets while playing expansive football in very wet conditions • This lead to the turnaround they experienced in the second 20 minutes of the 1st half, which was a significant improvement on 2011 • Canberra again toughed it out to level at 18-all. On the back of that they take the lead with 7 minutes remaining, despite the psychological setback of a disallowed try that would have put them in front after 37 minutes

Canberra’s mental vulnerabilities:

• The first 7 minutes; were they too nervous? too concerned about the wet? This is what the coaching staff need to identify. This is why a solid pre-game routine is required; to mentally prepare the players. If Canberra don’t have a pre-game routine (collectively and individually), they need to call CP. If they do have one, review it and see what went wrong. • Campese is an emotional leader; emotions cost energy and delay mental recovery from adversity. If Campese was less mentally fatigued maybe he doesn’t make the error in the 75th minute and Melbourne start their set from their own 20 or 30. If Campese doesn’t have a plan to manage his on-field emotions, he needs to call CP; if he does, he needs to review it so it can be improved. • Closing out the win got the better of the Raiders. They had defended multiple sets without conceding points during the match, yet not long after going ahead the match winner was scored by the opposition. How do you manage this? The same thing happened to NSW in Origin I, 2011. NSW players later admitted that they panicked. In the last 10 minutes of a game the mental element plays a greater role due to fatigue and because the result is on the line; both create pressure that mentally tough players handle and mentally vulnerable players don’t. Coaches need to have plans in place to manage this situation (whether in front or behind), especially from the mental perspective. For example, does a coach want their team to increase or decrease the tempo of play? Play conservative or expansive football? What about golden point? And so on. If you watch the last 10 minutes of Newcastle v St George you will notice that St. George were playing ‘golden point football’ before the 80 minutes were up – they have a plan; Canberra and NSW need one too. • The no-try decision and the alleged concern about Melbourne’s wrestling blame the loss on others (referees and opposition). Even if the try is awarded and Canberra lead 16-14 at half time (instead of being down 14-12) there is still no guarantee that after 40 minutes of football that Canberra go onto win the game. Awarding the try changes the course of the game, it doesn’t directly change the result.

Canberra Summary:

• Pre-game routine required to be implemented/reviewed to address start • Emotion regulation for players who experience frustration during the game • Set plan/strategy for closing out a game • Focus on and take responsibility for your own performance; not that of others

Melbourne’s mental strengths:

• Explosive start to the game • Able to play expansive football in very wet conditions • Didn’t panic when Canberra got back into the game • Solid start to the second half • Took advantage of an opportunity to attack and win the game by executing their skills

Melbourne’s mental vulnerabilities:

• They let the score board influence their play (concentration and attention) • They may have misjudged their opposition (based on history)

Melbourne Summary:

• They appear to have many mental skills covered; some just need improving (being influenced by the scoreboard; judging your opposition as easy/hard)