Coaches & Leadership
You don’t always agree with your coaches. That’s normal.
You’re seeing things from the field that they’re seeing from the sideline. You have a perspective on the game or your role or the situation that they don’t have. And sometimes that perspective is worth sharing. Sometimes it’s even right.
The question isn’t whether you’ll disagree. It’s how you do it. And how you do it makes all the difference.
Read this passage slowly.
Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
Romans 13:1 — NIVLet that sit for a second before you move.
The authority structure Paul describes in Romans 13 is not about blind obedience to authority regardless of its quality. It’s about recognizing that ordered community requires authority, and that working within that structure — with integrity and appropriate channels — is better for everyone than each person substituting their own judgment for the established order.
In a team context: the coaching staff has the decision authority. That doesn’t mean they’re always right. It means the decisions are theirs to make, and the team’s job is to implement those decisions fully while using appropriate channels to share their perspective.
What are the appropriate channels for athlete disagreement? The direct conversation, in private, with the coach who made the decision. Not the locker room conversation with teammates. Not the body language on the field that signals your disagreement to everyone watching. Not the comment to the media or the post on social media. The direct, private, respectful conversation.
In that conversation: state your perspective clearly, once. Ask questions to understand the reasoning. Receive the response, even if it doesn’t go the way you wanted. And then implement the decision with the same full commitment you’d give if it had been your idea.
That’s disagreeing well. It’s more effective than any alternative, and it’s the only version that keeps the trust intact.
The appropriate channel for disagreement is the direct, private, respectful conversation. Not the locker room. Not the body language. Not anywhere else.
Is there something you’re currently disagreeing with in your coaching that you haven’t addressed through the right channel? What would the right channel look like?
Action-oriented. The question is about identifying the right channel and using it, not just naming the disagreement.
Disagree directly, privately, respectfully. Then implement fully. That’s the right way.
Best used when athlete-staff tension has been building and needs a framework. It gives athletes permission to disagree while redirecting how they do it.