Ask is an acronym for Athletes Submitting Knowledge, an initiative recognized by AthletesCan.
When, Head Coach, John Herdman arrived in Canada to take charge of the Canadian Women's National Program, he found a broken team. We had just returned from a drubbing in the 2011 World Cup in Germany. When I say “drubbing” I use the term advisedly; Canada had literally come dead last at that tournament, scoring only one goal along the way. Although we had thought ourselves fully prepared for that major sporting event on the world stage, clearly something had been missing.
It was in this context that John Herdman arrived on the scene, with only a year to go before the London 2012 Olympic Games. I believe he arrived in Canada knowing our situation and with a plan fully formed on how he was going to deal with our “emotional trauma.” For me, it is this kind of foresight that defines what it means to be a leader. It means being proactive and always having a direction and plan, and not being confined to constantly reacting and adjusting to unforeseen circumstances.
In his first six months as our coach, John observed us and evaluated our respective leadership roles on the team. Many of the players on the team were veterans and had taken up the mantle of leadership out of seniority more than any ability, though a few players had both. What John was trying to find out was who had influence on the team and who it was exactly that these leaders were influencing.
John took his time evaluating each player’s leadership potential and then in identifying whom he wanted leading the team. He did all this because he knew that, in the end, it was going to be the players themselves who made the difference between winning and losing. A coach controls an awful lot, but no matter how much they want to be, they can never be out on the field with us.
While John was looking for leaders among the players, he also set himself up as a leader in a style that I can best describe as managerial. He was a manager of details; everything he did was tailored to the needs of his players, as individuals and as a group. He hired the best possible staff, bringing on board people who were not only the very best in their respective fields, but also people who were best able to extract every ounce of ability from the players on the team. He made himself available to all players, no matter what the subject, and he oversaw every detail of our preparation. Every single member of our bronze medal winning soccer team will tell you that nobody works harder than John. We had no choice as a team, but to put our heads down and "bust a gut. " Our coach, as well as every single member of his staff, was doing the same and more.
When in training camps and tournaments we would always see John in his room in endless meetings with his staff. These meetings would last well into each night and would be followed by early morning starts. John’s room looked like an army bunker with the officers planning and scheming their next attack. He had papers over every inch of his wall, videotapes prepared, and every game of every tournament was planned out in detail before the first whistle had even blown. I'm sure his plans changed constantly, but his basic framework was in place months before a game was played.
Despite his meticulous planning, John has an unshakeable belief in every single member of the team. In my experience, coaches often find themselves so concerned with their starting eleven that they sometimes overlook the equally important players on the bench. The first thing John did in arriving with the National Program was to rename these players “finishers.” He rightly pointed out that it is often the players that come into a game off the bench who make the difference. Consequently, they need to stay focused and know that they have the trust of both the Coach and the rest of the team. How can players who feel neglected and ignored make the impact needed to influence a result?
John implemented a pre-game day ritual of speaking to all players who would not be starting the following day. He would tell them, of course, that they were going to be finishers and not starters, but he would also tell them why, and what he was looking for from them. By doing this he eliminated the negative element that often creeps in before games when players who believe they should be starting find themselves on the bench. The finishers were given the platform to voice their feelings and thoughts about his decisions directly to the coach, removing much negative and potentially distracting grumbling behind the scenes which I have experienced in other teams.
John brought the same open approach to his game tactics. All the players knew that he and his assistants had stayed up most of the night plotting. We knew that their game review, videotape analysis and game plan were usually pretty thorough. However, we were still given a platform to question all these elements and to voice any concerns. The staff actually welcomed discussions on how we were going to be playing, believing that we had to completely buy into the game plan in order to execute it properly.
Just as John meticulously checked off every detail in his soccer preparation, he also took the same detailed approach to creating a leadership structure on his team. When he first arrived, John had watched the team closely for a long time. Eventually, he appointed a six member leadership group to be the core of his team. His purpose in identifying this group was not to create a tiered system amongst the players, but rather to place the burden of leadership onto these players’ shoulders. The entire team knew who was in this leadership group and were encouraged to help them become stronger by raising concerns, giving them ideas, and keeping them accountable. The leadership group was intended not only to hold the entire team accountable to a higher standard, but also to encourage these six to raise their own individual games. They served the dual purpose of leading the team as representatives, spokespeople and captains, while also maximizing their own potential as players.
The team leadership group was charged with leading the way and providing an example to the rest of the team. The group was composed of players whom the rest of the team could talk to, both on and off the field, with their issues, problems, or when they found themselves in a tight situation. When each woman in the group accepted her leadership role, she was also accepting the fact that she was publicly declaring that she would be raising her game. This type of public commitment was not an easy thing to do.
The Team Canada leadership group worked closely throughout the preparations for the London Olympics, both with the coach and with their fellow players. In this process, real bonds and links were formed. People talk about the need to be connected, but this rarely happens in as profound a way as I witnessed within this team. Rarely do you see a group of individuals all in step with one another, thinking the same things and sharing a mindset. As a team, we worked extremely hard to achieve all these things. Weeks before the tournament in London began, the team was working on coming together and creating an unbreakable bond. Many tears were shed in the process, as it was no easy matter to unite 21 individual players in this way.
The environment John created within Team Canada was set at the highest level. Not only was the overall leadership of the team expertly run, but there was also leadership taking place at every lervel. To be successful, every player had to play their part and nowhere was this more visible than in the bronze medal game against France. Many people will tell you that we were lucky to win this match, but this is not true. While I will admit that France were better than us on the day, there was nothing lucky about our victory. Already, at the very beginning of the game we had very little energy left in the tank, both emotionally and physically. This being said, we put every last ounce of our remaining energy into the match. France may have hit the post, but our players were literally throwing themselves in front of shots. No tackle was left unfinished and we made every available run. Nobody on the team cut any corners, because we knew that we would not only have been letting ourselves down, but but also our teammates. How could any of us let an opposing player run past when we KNEW that the player next to us was just as tired, and struggling just as much?
Proof of this total commitment came in the 92nd minute, when our left full-back summoned all her remaining energy and took the ball up the field on attack. Despite being utterly exhausted, the bronze medal winning goal was scored because she put everything she had left into getting that ball into an attacking position. Not only she, but also two midfielders made exhausting runs to get into the box instead of waiting at the halfway line for the next French attack. All this exertion and effort was truly amazing!
I am under no illusion as to why the team went from last in the 2011 World Cup in Germany to third at these 2012 Olympic Games. The reason can be ascribed to connectivity created by leadership. This victory was the result of hours spent in creating a common language and trust, in discussing and molding the team's identity. The coaching staff trusted us to raise the performance bar we had set for ourselves because they did the same thing. When a group comes together with one shared vision, anything is possible - dreams do come true!!
