Competitiveness is something intrinsic to human beings since the dawn of time. The need to win, to conquer, to be recognized was even one of the main drivers of the course of human history, as we know it.
In sport this is no exception. And this is where our reflection for today should begin: should "win/conquer" be the main indicator of a team's success?
The answer, in my view, is not as straightforward as it seems and it differs depending on the context in which we are inserted.
If we are talking about high competition, where everything comes down to victories and titles, then the "YES" to the question is clear. If we are talking about sport as entertainment and leisure, then the "NO" is direct too.
The doubt is accentuated when we talk about training teams, which can represent preparation for competition for some and just fun for others.
More than anything else, training serves to instill a taste for the sport, the importance of group/team work and respect for others. It is important to integrate all athletes and make them feel part of something in order to keep them enthusiastic and increasingly dedicated to the cause.
In a second instance, and in a more technical scope, the training levels should focus their work on the athlete's individual technique and on improving their perception of the game. It is important that he has room to experiment and to make mistakes, that he has the freedom to be creative and to innovate, that he exceeds himself and that he learns to overcome adverse situations during training/game.
What I see on a daily basis is that no one is prepared to give these tools to athletes and the main fault lies in "having to win"!
The coach neglects the technical aspects and the athlete's creativity in training in favor of infallible tactical moves that always have to be done in the same way and that always result in a goal! It doesn't matter if everyone plays, if the tallest or the left-handed or the fastest or the ones with the most potential are playing... what matters is playing with those who are better now and who give the team more victories at this moment and who enshrine hence the trainer as an elite training trainer!
The management evaluates the coach by the number of victories he has obtained, regardless of having lost athletes to another club/modality or if they were nothing more than mere good children and/or initiates.
The athletes' parents themselves criticize everything and everyone constantly: the athletes because they play poorly and make mistakes, the coach because he didn't make the right choices and therefore lost the game and the direction because he keeps the coach there who "doesn't understand any of this"!
Winning is important, yes!, but not at any cost. It is important that athletes have this will and that they learn to fight and work for victories. If they appear, the result of a correct formation work, so much the better! If, for them to happen, we have to give up the basic principles of training, described above, then this is almost a crime: the most likely outcome is that athletes give up the sport and others go from beasts to beasts as they progress in the field. age... and it's not their fault...
In summary, I am of the opinion that the success of a training coach should be measured by:
1 - The number of athletes that can attract to the modality;
2 - The number of athletes who manage, through their work, to promote and place them in high competition and in the national teams.
3 - NEVER for your titles
I conclude therefore that the importance of winning in the training levels is relative although its obsession can be more harmful than beneficial.
The day when we all believe in this and internalize this idea, maybe we can have more consecutive presences in a final phase of a European or a World Cup.
