As trainers, as coaches, we often feel the impulse to give.

We give our time, our energy, our passion. We create the setting, we provide the tools, we share the knowledge we've accumulated over years. We might see our primary task as getting the athlete from A to B, helping them take the next step. We "transmit."

That's a wonderful, and in our view, essential, part of the profession. But we increasingly wonder if that's the whole picture.

Recently, we were struck by an insight from a perspective not directly related to sports: Nonviolent Communication (NVC). The essence we extracted from it was as simple as it was profound: As a human being you can give a lot, but by not opening the door to receive, you do not allow the other person to give.

That sentence stuck. We started to compare it to the role of the coach.

The pitfall of the full backpack

We can picture it: an athlete wants to learn a new technique. Our "backpacks" as coaches are full of solutions: drills, analysis, feedback, encouragement. We start giving. We explain the drill, we correct the movement, we provide feedback. We give, and give, and give.

But what happens if we never give the athlete the chance to get something back? give?

And we don't mean saying "thank you." We mean giving back their own process. Their confusion. Their frustration. Their "aha" moment that's completely different from what we'd planned. Their unique, personal interpretation of the movement.

When we fill the space with our knowledge, is there still room for the athlete to owner To become part of the solution? If we solve the problem for them, aren't we depriving them of the chance to feel they can do it themselves?

Perhaps we're depriving them of the opportunity to contribute their commitment and struggle—the most valuable thing an athlete can offer—to the process. Because we've unconsciously closed the door to receiving.

Is leaving space an active choice?

For us, this is where coaching can reach a deeper level. For us, it's not logos It's about providing the right tools. It's increasingly about consciously creating space so the other person can give.

This doesn't feel like passivity. It's not a case of "just let them muddle through." For us, it feels like one of the most active and conscious choices you can make as a coach.

It is a rhythm of:

1. Give the setting: “Here is the field, this is the drill, this is the goal.”
2. The tools provide: “These are the technical points you should pay attention to.”
3. And then… take a step back. Be quiet. Watch.

It's daring to endure the silence. It's daring to look at the athlete's "mistake" without intervening immediately. It's building on the belief that the athlete has the capacity to solve the puzzle themselves, perhaps with a small hint, but not with a ready-made answer.

The process as the center

The moment we, as coaches, dare to receive – the doubt, the questions, the resistance, but also the unexpected creativity – we notice that something changes.

Then it feels like the coach is no longer the most important thing. The plan is no longer sacred.

The program process becomes the center.

It becomes an interaction, a dance. An impulse is given, the athlete receives it, processes it in their own way, and gives his or her unique performance. That performance is received and forms the basis for a new, adapted impulse.

We believe this is a place where sustainable development can emerge. The athlete, hopefully, no longer feels like an executor of a plan, but an owner of their own growth. They don't just learn the technique, they learn how They need to learn. They're not just developing a skill, they're building their confidence in their own abilities.

The coach's role then shifts from "the giver of answers" to "the guardian of the process." And that's a role we're beginning to find increasingly rich and satisfying.

Perhaps that is an important art of giving, we learn: consciously creating the space to receive.

---

Sources and Further Reading (For inspiration, not as truth)

For those who want to read more about the concepts that inspired this piece:

1. Nonviolent Communication (NVC): The insights into giving and receiving are strongly inspired by the work of Marshall B. Rosenberg. His book, "Nonviolent Communication: Disarming and Effective," is a standard work on how we communicate based on needs (such as the need to contribute, or 'giving').
   • Rosenberg, MB (2003). Nonviolent Communication: A Language of LifePuddleDancer Press. (Dutch edition: Nonviolent CommunicationPublisher Mens!.)
2. Self-Determination Theory (SDT): Although not explicitly stated, this article touches on ideas from Edward Deci and Richard Ryan's Self-Determination Theory. This theory describes three basic psychological needs that can influence motivation: autonomy (the sense of ownership and choice), competence (the feeling of being able to do something) and connectedness (binding). A coach who leaves space, would can nourish the athlete's autonomy and competence.
   • Ryan, RM, & Deci, EL (2017). Self-Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness. Guilford Publications.
   • Website: Center for Self-Determination Theory