Originally Posted by IainR
I wasn't sure, but aor a
perhaps might have guided me to the correct interpretation
I wasn't sure, but a
I am hoping that the FRA coaching coordinator has already opened discussion with UKA/English athletics over this and that those with the Level 2 Fell and Mountain will be able to access these free coaching resources in the near future to add to their coaching development. As has already been said on this thread many coaches would benefit from doing the endurance and sprint modules.
Perhaps a more radical solution is that the FRA course is changed to the Endurance coach one with the extra theory for fellrunning being put online and the extra day being a practical workshop run alongside the junior development squad sessions.
I would agree with that.
It's not that radical as the FMR2 course that I attended a few years ago was in effect the old Level 2 core and Endurance merged in to one course with perhaps 10 - 20% being more fell specific.
It perhaps always should have been the UKA endurance course with the FRA arranging bolt on Fell Specific units to be attained at level 2, 3 & 4 as a coach wants to progress.
In fact that is exactly what I thought I was signing up to - a level 2 Fell module.
I'm not sure there is really any need for fell coaching.. just some slight tweaks to a standard programme, but look at guys like road runner, or Tim Davies.. their training programme is pretty much miles and miles and comparable to road runners.. which road runner is.. but Tim or Andy Davies wouldn't do that much which is different..
Coaching in this country, in most sports is very poorly viewed and supported. The problem is too many of the quails are just box ticking exercises by the relevant bodies.. and not detailed enough or long enough to be of any real benefit.. Look at the FA coaching system compared to Europe..
In support of the training provided by the coaching team at the FRA and the courses and training now available; last night I observed at a fell coaching session over 60 young people being fully engaged by a team of coaches and helpers who were clearly demonstrating the knowledge and skills that they have learnt on the FRA level 2 and the Coaching in Running Fitness courses. The experience provided had significantly moved on from a year ago. The young people all had a smile on their face, were working really hard and were inspired by the games, reps that they were taking part in. The FRA courses are invaluable, for those who wish to introduce young people to fell running, but those who have a desire should be encouraged and be able to access all UKA coaching resources.
And ask Andi what is his weakness and he'll tell you he struggles to descend. He was challenged at Snowdon last year because of that and he even struggled at the World Trials at Witton Park with the steps part of the descent which probably cost him 1st place.
Those endurance runners of all ages that come from Road, XC and track for the international trials or Inter Counties, often very high class, tend to struggle with descending and as a coach I would be grateful for more advise on how to coach someone to descend without risk of repetitive ankle turns etc.
Of course that doesn't mean a course necessarily, but you acknowledge the merits of accreditation so much that I would have thought you would have slightly more regard for the efforts to have coaching accreditation in our sport.
I do, I just have seen soccer coaching ruined by loads of people having 1-2 day courses and basically called coaches.. yet poorly qualified.. lack of drills.. lack of variability...
I think the need for quick 'qualifications' is a dangerous choice.. I know Sarah went on the course and never completed as she thought it was incredibly basic and uninformative.
So who coached Andy? TBH I don't think we are in a position where we know what good training is yet.. Get the top 20 in the english champs to write down their weekly training and I doubt you'll see much consensus..
I think we'd be better off training kids like Menai Track and field do, on the track, with fun sessions, little pressure, enjoyable. We know far more about how to train for mainstream athletics. And Menai has produced its fair share of top fell runners from that system.
Thanks for the heads up WP, didnt realise this & its disappointing (& a bit odd) to hear. Will follow up with coaching coordinator. It was Gazmuz who mentioned this to me last night at training, where as he said lots of children getting uphill & downhill technique input intergrated into the various endrance sessions they were doing from coaches trained on the FRA courses (1 & 2).
I've done both those courses & found them hugely helpful, from both an endurance perspective and specific fell work, exactly what I & the coaches at my club need to develop young fell runners. So I do feel they work, doing exactly what they say on the tin.
No idea re UKA or where that edict came from, but doesnt seem right or fair. As I say, will follow up as much as I can & see what the crack is.
I asked UKA / EA for clarification some weeks ago and haven't received a comprehensive reply as to the reasons behind this. I can't open some of the publicity material but my interpretation, backed up by communication with EA, is that the free courses are open to those who have done, or are doing, the new T&F courses. They are not available to anyone who has done a previous L1 or Endurance L2 or those who have done, or are doing, a recent CiRF. BUT they are available to those who did do a L3 when they were available ( I've asked whether this includes L3 Endurance or Fell but no specific answer ). So they are basically blocking any Endurance or Fell coaches unless they completed a L3 or 4 which will restrict the numbers drastically. The only reasoning I have been given is that the Endurance / Fell courses did not contain some content which the previous T&F did have and new Event ( Triple Jump etc ) do have, don't know what this is.
I don't understand this as the bulk of UKA coaches have Endurance qualifications, others suspect its a cost issue.
Richard's opening comment / question about the irrelevance of the Fell coaching courses is inaccurate, I can confirm :
- UKA fully support the Fell LiRF and FMR programmes and see them as relevant, they still count and a programme of 3 Fell LiRF and 1 FMR Coach courses are being rolled out in 2012 with the same in 2013.
- UKA / EA have been in discussions with the FRA over reveiw and updating of the FMR Coach and this is planned for the summer of 2012 with delivery in the next course in the Autumn.
- UKA / EA are OK with the content, in fact if you look at the activities and resources in the recently released CiRF courses you'll see some has been lifted straight from the FMR which is a compliment in itself.
- The FMR has never been advertised as bolt on, its always been a stand alone coaching qualification.
I agree with Lauren's points about Sprints and have taken note of Richard's request for a bolt on course about uphill / downhill - in fact, this has already been discussed in outline with UKA / EA as the coverage of this in the UKA CiRF is light - part of the proposed UKA coaching system being developed is bolt on courses for people who have the Coach qualification to undertake modules for horizontal CPD. I wouldn't mind guessing that this is part of the reason behind the blocking discussed above - I think they've done T&F first as its their priority and specialism for most at a high level in UKA and will move onto the various forms of Endurance later on after the Olympics - thats my personal thoughts though.
Further to Richard's point about the FMR course being the old L2 with 10-20% Fell - inaccurate. The FMR course was developed from the UKA UKCC pilot for Endurance which was pitched at between L2 & L3, it does share some of the same activities on course and in the logbook because they are relevant. Richard did not attend, as he says, the 2nd weekend and so missed much of the fell specific content. In addition, the FMR Coach is a 4 day course compared to 3 days on the current UKA alternative, the CiRF, which is to accomodate the extra fell related content and skills.
Iain's points :
-the reference to the course being 'basic' is not bourne out by the views of the delivery team, UKA / EA and coaches who have attended the FMR but also have done the old L2 - they all agree that it is at a higher level.
- the inference to the courses not being developed after consultation with attendees has no basis at all, the course now is vastly different to the origonal in many respects.
- his questioning of the need for fells coaching reveals his ignorance of the course content and skills and is not evidenced by the demand for the courses, the excellent reviews it recieves from people who attend or the origonal reasons why they were set up - because the existing UKA courses did not meet the needs of the fell running community. UKA is struggling to fill LiRF and CiRF courses, the FRA courses have never been cancelled and always fill up quick - in fact, the tutor team reckons there are usually too many on them for comfort.
-If his evidence base for the above comes from the comments of Sarah, one of only 3 people from 42 who have started the course and completed both weekends, I suggest he needs to ask around a bit more before committing himself to such comments on a public forum.
- the comments about MTLB refer to his complaint elsewhere on the forum that the Fell LiRF in 1 day gives the same insurance cover as many more he had to do with the MLTB, as I replied in the email to him - I don't have a problem with UKA's insurers covering us for that. If that gives him a problem with added competition to his business then that's his problem, the FRA are just ensuring that fell coaches are covered.
Welcome to the forum Gra. I am sure you will love it on here. Mizuno WH or Inov8 then?
Powered by Ugali.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote