Do spectators now know better?

[blockman]

We don't have a coaching mindset and we're just watching at all but it doesn't stop us from analyzing decisions, plays, and rosters when we're watching sports that we love.
It is very common to have that commentary whenever we watch games that it seems not working along with how we're expecting it to be. In the end, we're making speculations that this and that is much better if done and decided by the coach.

[1714696750]

1714696750

[1714696750]

1714696750

[1714696750]

1714696750

[1714696750]

1714696750

[1714696750]

1714696750

[1714696750]

1714696750

[Saisher]

-Is there a possibility that spectators of a sport like you and i with no professional training can develop a better understanding of a sport than some professional coaches of some teams?

That's not going to happen, it takes a lot of things to become a coach, in fact, to be a coach you have to go through proper training, be a player or become an assistant coach first, you must know everything inside of the team and how to build and motivate a team you don't pick a guy out of spectators and think he can coach, there are good spectators of games but that doesn't mean they will be good in coaching.

[harizen]

-Is there a possibility that spectators of a sport like you and i with no professional training can develop a better understanding of a sport than some professional coaches of some teams?

It's not spectators have a better understanding but their analysis makes sense. And as a spectator, they observed well the team's performance. They are more a bit of relaxed that's why they see everything from the team's advantages to the team's disadvantages.

Just look in NBA for example, most famous analysts is not basketball players before. And those players who end up as an analyst is not good at making analysis, speculations, and predictions.

[goinmerry]

Sometimes, speculators know better because they know the team's performance for long. They are watching them for long, following them for long, so they know what's the best thing that a certain team will do as an advantage. In actual sports, coaches and players are ended up in a different situation making them sometimes confused about what to do as they are pressured to win.

[Lanatsa]

Spectators (Couch Coaches) have the luxury to make calm decisions, without any stress at home, because they are not under pressure. A lot of the actual coaches have to make split decisions based on 1000's of strategies that has been discussed with the players in the week before.

Hehehe indeed. Most fans turned couch coaches only become an "expert" after the match is over. It's much easier to say things in hindsight and actual coaches doesn't have that luxury. Another thing they are criticized for is not making adjustments or substitutions during a match when things aren't looking good but it's not that easy as well.

This is just actually like when market tends to have a bull run then everyone turns out to be price or market analysts. hehe. This case was no different

whenever there are some incidents happen or outcome which doesn't really turns out to be that not appealing or good into their eyes then criticism would comes next. What would you expect?

Spectators does really have always words which they could eventually say as if they are much better than with those coaches.

[ene1980]

~
-Is there a possibility that spectators of a sport like you and i with no professional training can develop a better understanding of a sport than some professional coaches of some teams?

There is no question that we have a educated crowd who love the sport, but that does not mean that we are better than the coach and we know better about the tactical games better than what they are implementing. But we know the sport inside out and as a fan you can comment on those aspects when you are watching the game.

Just look in NBA for example, most famous analysts is not basketball players before. And those players who end up as an analyst is not good at making analysis, speculations, and predictions.

To be a analyst you need to have mike skills to and you need to express, some of the players might not be able to do that, but there are former players that can accurately make the analysis and identify the spots.

[GreatArkansas]

(...)
-Is there a possibility that spectators of a sport like you and i with no professional training can develop a better understanding of a sport than some professional coaches of some teams?

This is different and it depends. If a speculator is doing some gambling and the coach or player is not a very huge difference. But for the sake of experience, we all know players/coaches known better and a lot of understanding but could be "limited", while speculators could compare different games/teams if this speculator is into game or serious to know everything.

[nurilham]

The coaches may set a strategy and release the starting players depending on some considerations. Besides considering the current performance and the condition of their players, the coaches will learn the opponents' strategy, characteristics of the players. With this method, probably there is a rotation or a change in starting players or strategy (formation, tactics). In a certain situation, the coaches also can give specific instructions to the players. So, don't be so surprised if there is a change, the match can be dynamic.

[hahay]

Well, I don't think it only happens in sports because normally, viewers will always comment on what they're watching. Say something like a news show that tells about development or anything related to your city or country, at least the audience will have their own opinion, right. So in this case, it doesn't mean that the audience who gives comments is someone who knows everything or whatever, it's just a comment that usually happens to be discussed at a certain moment and it has been happening for a long time until now.

[Mauser]

-Is there a possibility that spectators of a sport like you and i with no professional training can develop a better understanding of a sport than some professional coaches of some teams?

I would definitely say yes, hardcore sport fans know everything about a team and will question often the decision of the coach. Good fans know the strength and weaknesses of all players and would be able to coach a team for a game. The difference between the coach and the fan is that it's the job of the coach do make decisions everyday. Being able to manage a team through the whole season is a tough job. It's hard to live with so much competition in the top football leagues, there is not much room for error. I don't think that the average fan would be able to be coach for a long period of time.
As a spectator it always easier to comment on a game after it, we know what went wrong and had more time to think about it. For the coach he has to make such kind of decision within minutes and he doesn't have all the information yet. If a player is having a bad day the coach could substitute him, but what if another player gets injured and he used all his substitute slots before? There is also the problem of favouritism, a coach might have a stronger bond with a certain player and will use him even if he is not performing 100%. Such decision will make the fans very angry if the team loses the game.

[Sanitough]

Sometimes I feel I know better than the coach by just watching my favorite game.

I guess it's human nature for a fan to think that we know the game very well because he put out interest in it.
As a gambler, I could put myself in the shoes of a player, a team, a coach, and even on the management, that's how deep my love for the sport I've been playing and that just makes me more satisfied with what I'm doing though honestly, I lose a significant amount sometimes.

[mu_enrico]

-Is there a possibility that spectators of a sport like you and i with no professional training can develop a better understanding of a sport than some professional coaches of some teams?

Yes, it's possible, but often it's just because of asymmetric information. Pundit only looks at the match day performance, and not measuring progress, fitness level, and training performance. Often the coach sees Player A is in a good physical shape, training well, seems can be trusted. But on D-Day, he plays like a crap. Thus Pundit questioned the coach judgment instead of other things, like Player A choked. Conversely, Player B is a troublemaker (not discipline), not training well, and prone to injury, but he often plays well on D-Day. Thus, fans and Pundit think he is a better player and should be played more where it can be just a fluke.

Speaking of tactics, the team needs to understand and execute tactics correctly before it can be deployed in a real match. Often, pundits are just like "why not use tactics X or Y?" when the coach already tried it but failed in training.

[gabbie2010]

-Is there a possibility that spectators of a sport like you and i with no professional training can develop a better understanding of a sport than some professional coaches of some teams?

I think this is felt by all the football fans in the world, they suddenly know more than every inch of the game. But the fact is not at all much better know. It's just that all the comments that emerged from the audience that he thought were true. But just try this and that comment that is made as a football spectator commentator, it is not necessarily true that he becomes a coach.

Don't be surprised, this is common, fans always comment from behind a glass screen, it doesn't mean you can become a coach or a player on the field.

Spectators can only analyze a game based on a particular qualities of some well known player in a club they are supporting however they never knew that the coach/manager has a close contact with each of the players during the training sessions thus picked his team based on individual player fitness, form and tactical formation to be used in executing of a particular match, that is why coaches and managers always take the blame when  the match is lost. Spectators can only verbally analyze matches which quite different when playing live match.

[carlisle1]

Sometimes I feel I know better than the coach by just watching my favorite game.

I guess it's human nature for a fan to think that we know the game very well because he put out interest in it.
As a gambler, I could put myself in the shoes of a player, a team, a coach, and even on the management, that's how deep my love for the sport I've been playing and that just makes me more satisfied with what I'm doing though honestly, I lose a significant amount sometimes.

Human nature as it is, most of the time, you are thinking that you know who should be playing inside. You are not trusting the coach

judgement, you are basing your assessment on the previous games a player had. Most of those gamblers have this kind in mind when they think

that the team are not performing, blaming the coach is always their reasons, sometimes, they wanted to replace the coach if it's possible being done.

[Zilon]

-Is there a possibility that spectators of a sport like you and i with no professional training can develop a better understanding of a sport than some professional coaches of some teams?

Yes a spectator with no formal training can develop a better coaching skill than a trained coach and this happens when this spectators develop so much love and passion for the kind of sports they watch. Now as a spectator who has followed a certain sports for years and have a club which you fan you will know the strength of the team you fan and will know how each of them perform and even which wing each of them play so when there is a wing switch or poor performance those spectators would know better how to play and which formation would have been preferred

[xSkylarx]

-Is there a possibility that spectators of a sport like you and i with no professional training can develop a better understanding of a sport than some professional coaches of some teams?

Yes a spectator with no formal training can develop a better coaching skill than a trained coach and this happens when this spectators develop so much love and passion for the kind of sports they watch. Now as a spectator who has followed a certain sports for years and have a club which you fan you will know the strength of the team you fan and will know how each of them perform and even which wing each of them play so when there is a wing switch or poor performance those spectators would know better how to play and which formation would have been preferred

Yes, that is correct, and I believe that if I were to be spectating, I would be able to think quickly and accurately, perhaps even predict the next move. I believe this is due to the fact that I am a little nervous while playing and do not think clearly. By simply watching, you could gain a great deal of knowledge, which you could then use to gain skills and become a better coach because you already have some experience in the field. In addition to enjoying the game as a spectator, I also enjoy it when it is intense.

[dunfida]

-Is there a possibility that spectators of a sport like you and i with no professional training can develop a better understanding of a sport than some professional coaches of some teams?

Yes a spectator with no formal training can develop a better coaching skill than a trained coach and this happens when this spectators develop so much love and passion for the kind of sports they watch. Now as a spectator who has followed a certain sports for years and have a club which you fan you will know the strength of the team you fan and will know how each of them perform and even which wing each of them play so when there is a wing switch or poor performance those spectators would know better how to play and which formation would have been preferred

Yes, that is correct, and I believe that if I were to be spectating, I would be able to think quickly and accurately, perhaps even predict the next move. I believe this is due to the fact that I am a little nervous while playing and do not think clearly. By simply watching, you could gain a great deal of knowledge, which you could then use to gain skills and become a better coach because you already have some experience in the field. In addition to enjoying the game as a spectator, I also enjoy it when it is intense.

As a spectator then you would really be having that kind of mindset and behavior on which you do really trying to predict those next moves that could happen and making opinions basing on what you do see which i could say its a normal kind of attitude or behavior of someone whose watching.

Does it mean that were/theyre much better? No its not. Those are just speculations too but doesnt mean that theyre good enough.

[Congyang]

Sometimes I feel I know better than the coach by just watching my favorite game.

I guess it's human nature for a fan to think that we know the game very well because he put out interest in it.
As a gambler, I could put myself in the shoes of a player, a team, a coach, and even on the management, that's how deep my love for the sport I've been playing and that just makes me more satisfied with what I'm doing though honestly, I lose a significant amount sometimes.

this may be because you are more confident in yourself because you can only describe and simulate it in your mind without knowing this will work or not when applied directly in real matches.
on the other hand for the coach himself is a different thing and not everyone can do that, because indeed they need to do it right, especially for teams that are really big and the target is to win for example.
This is not to mention mental and other things that can make players motivated and obedient to the coach's decisions.
I think it's a difficult thing to do

[uneng]

-Is there a possibility that spectators of a sport like you and i with no professional training can develop a better understanding of a sport than some professional coaches of some teams?

Yes, it's possible, but often it's just because of asymmetric information. Pundit only looks at the match day performance, and not measuring progress, fitness level, and training performance. Often the coach sees Player A is in a good physical shape, training well, seems can be trusted. But on D-Day, he plays like a crap. Thus Pundit questioned the coach judgment instead of other things, like Player A choked. Conversely, Player B is a troublemaker (not discipline), not training well, and prone to injury, but he often plays well on D-Day. Thus, fans and Pundit think he is a better player and should be played more where it can be just a fluke.

Speaking of tactics, the team needs to understand and execute tactics correctly before it can be deployed in a real match. Often, pundits are just like "why not use tactics X or Y?" when the coach already tried it but failed in training.

What you say makes sense...

Have anyone ever heard of Dunning Kruger effect? This effect shows the more uneducated, clueless people are about something, more confident they become that they have the perfect solution for that, because they see everything in a very plain, simplistic way. I think I could relate it to spectators who imagine they are more capable than teams' coaches, while in fact they don't know anything, because they don't participate the daily life of the team, trainings and preparations for the games. So I don't think spectators know better.

[shield132]

-Is there a possibility that spectators of a sport like you and i with no professional training can develop a better understanding of a sport than some professional coaches of some teams?

It is my experience that most athletic, fitness and sports coaches are not good at what they do.

They're usually people who might know some of the basics and have some background in the sport they coach. For them coaching is a 9 to 5 job where they do nothing to expand, update or improve their knowledge base. They continue to use the same basic knowledge they were taught which will often be outdated or obsolete.

As a result, there are fans who are more credible and informed than coaches. Simply due to fans being bigger students of the game and being more up to date. This is a very common theme. Even at the highest levels of coaching in sports, there is a significant proportion of the population that does not belong there and does not legitimately deserve their position.

I think the main accent here from the OP is on football/basketball matches and on similar sports. But what you say about athletic and fitness coaches is definitely true and I can confirm that from my experience. In the area where I live, fitness coaches always stick with the same routine: Traditionally 12 rep 4 set on almost every exercise, traditionally the same low calorie/low fat diet and traditionally the same routine even on anabolics. This industry is most likely bro science in a lot of areas. I have been in touch with a lot of fitness instructors in my country and I haven't seen anyone trying something innovative, like keto diet, 5x5 set/rep, HIIT cardio, etc. It's really boring when you only copy/paste everything and the routine is similar of a robot.