The dilemmas of talented children - a conversation with Paddy McQueen - The Talent Equation Podcast

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
So this is a really exciting moment for me. It's rekindling.
I've been very much as most people know who've been
listening to the podcast, I've been rekindling my action and
love for the subject of ethics and sport. I really
stumbled across ethics and philosophy of sport in my undergraduate degree.

(00:26):
I met Mike McNamee, who massively kindled a huge fire
in me around studying philosophy, and I suppose in a
different walk of life, if I've come across philosophy earlier,
I probably would have gone into more detail. But it's
always been an area of great interest to me and
it's a lens through which I now look at most
of the problems facing sports practitioners sports policymakers. So I'm

(00:47):
delighted to be joined by Paddy McQueen from Swansea University. Paddy,
welcome to the Talent Equation.

Speaker 2 (00:54):
Thank you great to be here, Thanks for inviting me along.

Speaker 1 (00:57):
Brilliant. So I've recently joined. I think I'm a bit
I feel like i'm a bit of an impostor because
there's a load of people who've got together and formed
a bit of a kind of discussion reading group looking
at different subject matters sources. I think they're mostly students
studying sports philosophy and sports ethics, and I've managed to

(01:19):
infiltrate somehow, partially I think because of my connection with
my matame. But anyway, the first source that we discussed
or we read, I think in this new group was
a paper that Paddy wrote, which was absolutely fascinating. But
before we jump into that, because I really wanted to,
and I've invited Patty to talk about it, But before
we jump into all of that, Patty, I wonder if

(01:40):
you wouldn't mind just maybe introducing yourself to the audience
and talked a little bit about your journey and how
you actually stumbled into this crazy world of sports philosophy
sports ethics.

Speaker 2 (01:50):
Sure, yeah, yeah, thanks Ju. Yes, So mine is Paddy mcgeene.
As you said, I'm a lecturer in philosophy at One's University.
So yeah, my back and really is is not in
sports ethics. And I did my pH d on gender
politics and feminism and a lot of my But but
since then I've been increasingly interested in in the topic

(02:11):
of kind of ethics and moral philosophy in general, the
kind of academic region too. It was an increasing interest
in the family and theories of childhood and and and
kind of moral debate or ethical debates around parenting, and
so that that kind of led into this interest in
this particular paper on kind of talented children, how we

(02:31):
developed talent in children. So so the kind of acadical
scholarly Jenny in trip was quite odd and almost sort
of unexpected. I suppose a slight personal background, so I
spect it to give it a kind of an anecdote.
What really sparked this this paper in my interest in
this topic was when I was at school and there

(02:52):
was a kid who was who is much better than
all of us at football. He's very good, got signed
up for the local team to play in their their
they development in their academy. And I remember meeting him
when maybe with in our twenties or something, and and
he just said to me, I don't I don't think
it kind of worked out real wise for him. And

(03:12):
he just said, I really wish i'd kind of had
your child like your childhood. When you guys were having fun,
you're meeting up for the weekend, you know, he was
at home, he was off playing matches at the weekend
said I really wish I'd had more fun. And I
always like, even fact that does really kind of stuck
with me, thinking like, well, yeah, how to think about that.
And then and then when I was doing my PhD,

(03:36):
and for a few years afterwards, I lived in Belfast
and there was a tennis club and I remember I
usually use a gym in the tennis club, and every
morning that there was this a female tennis player who
was brilliant. She was clearly much better that than ever.
She was absolutely fantastic. And every morning sometimes I go
to the gym, first in the morning, sometimes in the afternoon,
about five at the end of the day, the end
of the working day, whenever I went, she was there.

(03:58):
And then I sometimes go at weekends. Any time of
the weekend, she was there, and I just thought, gosh,
this is you know, she is literally morning afternoon weekend
there with her dad. And obviously tennis players, you know,
your odds of professional success in tennis, that just yeah,
if you're not in the sort of top one hundred,
you're basically not making your money. It's you know, it's

(04:20):
not great. And I thought, she she is investing all
this time and energy and she's not going to make it,
And as a philosopherist, I was interested in the ethics
of that. I thought, is this is this? Is this good
in that kind of rich ethical sense? Am I just
had the interest in the philosophy of parenting. I thought,
if I was her parent, what would I do? So
sorry that that's kind of a long way of introduction

(04:40):
into this topic, but that's kind of how how I
got there.

Speaker 1 (04:44):
Fascinating. Uh, And again I said, one of the things
I was really keen to talk to you about it
is when I read your paper, it really resonated with
me in terms of the journey I've been on as
a sporting parent and as a coach, and also I as
a policymaker working you know, in the industry, and also
working as a you know, kind of a club chair

(05:07):
responsible for the duty of you know, with a duty
of care for lots of these young people, and lots
of the stuff I've been doing has been related to this,
this area raising questions I suppose about the you know,
the relative value I suppose of various, you know, different
aspects of sporting life. And you know, I've I guessed

(05:27):
to a certain extent, largely in this podcasts been championing
a bit of an ethical crusade to ask questions around
why we're doing things the way we're doing them, and
if if it's right that we are so I wouldn't
I wonder if wouldn't, because I I'd love to know.
Obviously this was an interest of yours, and so the
kind of the basis of the paper, so, I mean,

(05:49):
the paper that we studied, and I just I found
really interesting was you described it essentially as a parental dilemma.
And I really like this because I've actually written blogs
in the past about the parental dilemma. And the reason
I've written and the things I was writing about were
I used to meet parents quite regularly, and you know,

(06:12):
these are often parents who'd actually had their own developmental journeys.
You know, they've been that'd been through you know, you know,
the pathways and all these various different things. And I
remember distinctly speaking to a couple of them, and actually
some of the conversations been quite recent, but in the
world of football, Like when I remember a parent who
had a really promising child who was just starting out,

(06:38):
I don't remember they might not have been any any
older than seven maybe seven or eight, and she was saying,
oh yeah, oh yeah, he's got trials at such and such,
such and such a professional club about an hour and
a half away, and I said, oh wow, it's brilliant.
She went, well, to be honest, we kind of hope
he doesn't get in. Why they went and they went, well,

(07:00):
I mean, like he's got a train three four days
a week. The burden it places on him, the burden
and places on us. But if he does get in,
I can't not go because like what an opportunity it
is for him. So this kind of sense of powerlessness
and like weirdly, this weird hope that they don't get
this selected and that has stuck with me a lot,

(07:21):
and I've then heard subsequent stories and it sort of
keeps coming back to me. So you talked about this
parental dilemma. I've experienced it myself. I've experienced it speaking
to other parents. So I wonder if you wouldn't just
sort of almost like you know, gently guide me through
through the kind of the core elements of the paper.
And there's a few kind of key areas that I
obviously want to like pull on with you. But I

(07:43):
mean I think maybe the starting point was you talked
about the nature of whether sort of talent journeys are
an inherent good, and he talked about this notion of goods,
which I quite like talking about as well. So anyway,
let's just I'll let you you've guide me, because otherwise
it will go off all over the place.

Speaker 2 (08:00):
Sure, yeah, yeah, So, as you say, I frame it
as as a prinal dilemic. So I was I was
interested in what should should we as parents decide for
our children. So some children when they're young show, you know,
a lot of promise, a lot of talent. You know,
even at kind of five, six seven, there are those
children who are just a lot better than everyone else

(08:22):
at certain things. I focus on sport in the paper,
but it's meant to sort of be wider than that,
So you can think of other activities like music, professional
musicians and these sorts of things, or chess or whatever.
So I was interested in what should what kind of
choices should we parents make, particularly so that the assumption
is we all want the best of our children, We

(08:44):
want our children's lives to go well, and so what
kind of choices should we make as parents around the
development of our of our children's talents, and so, as
you said, you know, how far should we push them
to succeed in certain sports? How much time should we invest?
And I suppose that the philosophical kind of contribution I
was trying to make with saying that the way we

(09:06):
think about this is going to be really strongly shaped
by what a what we think good childhood is. So
so what should a childhood be like? Ideally, is there
a kind of best for native form or type of childhood?
And philosophers who work in this area typically talk about
childhood goods, the goods that contribute towards a good childhood.

(09:27):
So we could talk about that in a little bit.
But so the first thing is to think about that,
and then the second one one was to think about
how we think childhood of childhood in relation to adulthood.
And again there are different sort of philosophical theories about
the relationship between being a child and being an adult.
And for example, one of you might say, well, the
whole purpose of being a child is just to become

(09:49):
an adult. It's merely this kind of preparatory stage where
you're simply this sort of undeveloped adult. And that view
might lend itself to saying, well, we don't really care
that much about childhood. What matters is is the adult
you become. So let's let's let's you know, push for
what we're what we're focused on is, you know, that
child succeeding as an adult, becoming say a professional footballer.

(10:11):
We're not too worried about the costs or the impact
on their childhood because that doesn't really matter. A lot
of Phlossop was a push back against that for you
recently and said, no, we need to understand that childhood
is this unique and kind of intrinsically valuable stage that
there isn't You're not. It's not just preparation for adulthood.
It matters in and of its own right. And then

(10:31):
there's questions about how do we weigh you know, good
childhood versus a good adulthood. So what does it mean
for a childhood to be good? How does that weigh
against a good adulthood? So there were the kind of
theoretical interests I was interested in, and then a lot
of the papers just looking at the demands and and
you know costs that developing children's talent imposes. So so

(10:52):
again we can talk about some of that, but you know,
the significant We've already mentioned the significant time implications. But
I was interested in picking out some other things, you know,
the impact on the parent child relationship, you know, how
the child might view the parent if they're if they're
you know, becoming more of a coach than a parent,
and thinking through that. So then and then it was

(11:13):
thinking about the possible benefits and adulthood and weighing that
against the kind of benefits and costs of childhood. So
so then so that was the main focus on the paper.
And then just to the very end, I was then
interested in stepping back a bit and saying, okay, that
there's a question of what we want as parents for
our children. There's also I think an interesting perspective that

(11:34):
we as a society have. So I tried to sort
of have a double dilemma that there's the interest that
parents have for you know, making their child's lives as
good as possible, and how to think about that. But
then there's I think we as a society have an
interest in people being excellent. We have a society. We
want people to have maximized their talent. It's great for

(11:55):
us if we have these phenomenal athletes, these phenomenal musicians
who have dedicated their entire life to their sport or
that their activity or profession. So then I was just
a little stepping back and thinking about how society as
a whole views the talent, of the development of talent,
and how that might clash with the kind of ethical

(12:15):
demands made on parents. And so then there was a
question of how should we as members of society and
as parents think about the kind of duties we have
towards our children and how we should try And you know, essentially,
I suppose a fundamental question is to what extensive parents
try to maximize our children's talent. And the paper as
an attempt to think through the ethics.

Speaker 1 (12:33):
Of that, Yeah, I mean there was so many elements
to it, and I sort of one of the things
that really struck me about the dilemma was when the
way you framed it, and I think you, if I'm right,
you used or at least there's a framing in the

(12:56):
paper where you talk about three views of sort of childhood.
One was which I think you've just alluded to, the
sapling view, the fruit view, and the caterpillar view. I
mean they caught my I think in analogies anyway, So
they caught my imagine imagination straight away. But I wonder

(13:17):
if you wouldn't mind just kind of like explaining those
a little bit more, and then we can use those
as a bit of a framing to talk about this. Sure.

Speaker 2 (13:24):
Yeah, yeah, So I have to credit a philosopher called
Patrick Tomlin with this. So he has a really nice
paper on how we think about children's well being and
what a good childhood is, and he develops these three
Yet he's like mesh forward to analogies for childhood. So
as you say that, he first identifies a sapling view,
which sees the child as a sort of yeah, just

(13:48):
undeveloped adult. And the process of childhood is simply developing
the child into being a kind of good or flourishing adults.
So childhood is this purely sort of instrumental phase towards
childhood doesn't really have much value in its own right,
it's just so we see the child as yet it's
just just a sort of undeveloped adult. And then the

(14:13):
fruit view. I'm trying to get this right. So that's
sapling view. So and this sappening view would tend to
see adulthood as inferior. Sorry, childhood is inferior the adulthood.
So the fruit through fruit view would tend to go
the other way. Let me get this right. So the

(14:35):
fruit view this is terrible. I should know this. So
the few you would see them as fundamentally oh that's it.
So the fruit view would see childhood as superior to adulthood.
So there's something kind of wonderful and beautiful and precious
and amazing about childhood. And then and then the shift

(14:57):
into adulthood is the sort of yes, good phase. So
in the way that fruit rots, it starts off lovely,
and then as you gets older it sorts of rot. Say,
there's something sort of less desirous about adulthood than about childhood.
And then the third view is the cater bill of
you and the caterpillary. In the cater pillar view says
that these are simply completely distinct phases. Just as the

(15:19):
caterpillar turns into a butterfly, these are kind of fundamentally
different entities, as it were. Crucially, they're different in the
sense that what is good for the caterpillar is different
what is good for the adult, for the for the butterfly. Sorry.
So with that view, what what what makes for a
good childhood is going to be fundamentally distinct from what

(15:41):
makes for a good adulthood, and we can't see them
as simply the same phase where one stage is better
than the other. They're just completely distinct. So those are
the three views, and I think that the view which
depending on which view adopt, you'll have a different perspective
or you'll think through the ethics of talent development and

(16:02):
particularly talent maximization in children quite differently.

Speaker 1 (16:07):
And I really liked this, and this is one of
the reasons why I really wanted to sort of communicate
this to other people. So I think so, well, firstly,
I don't I hadn't thought about these views of childhood before,

(16:28):
and I knew though instinctively I probably my bias leant
towards the fruit view. My view was that, you know,
childhood was precious. I had. I was very fortunate to have,
you know, a really wonderful childhood where I traveled the
world and explore different cultures, and in through exploring different

(16:55):
culture cultures, particularly indigenous cultures in Africa and Papua New Guinea,
places that you know, learn a lot about free plays
as a big part of childhood. And you know, I
got some very strong memories, but sort of like the
strong memories I have, for example, were the kinds of
toys that would be fashioned. So obviously, you know, you're

(17:16):
a very expat Western society. We're you know, melting pot
of expacts from all over the place, and when you're
mixing with kids from the indigenous populations, you'd see what
they played with and how they played and the things
that they used to play, and they didn't have the
sort of Western toys that we had, and you know
those sorts of you know, things that are provided to
play with. They had like things that were fashioned, you know,

(17:38):
so things on sticks that made a kind of rudimentary
like unicycle, but not a unicycle that you would ride,
one that you would push. But it was a fascinating thing.
And we as Western kids, were way more attracted to
these kind of individually fashioned toys than the ones that

(17:59):
we were given that was sort of had this sort
of like singular use because there was so much more
creativity and then also the other sorts of things around
games and play and being outdoors. So anyway, so I
always probably I think have had a bias around how
childhood was so precious, you know, and I've always had
a big driver to protect my children's childhood and not

(18:20):
to kind of insert myself into you know, because I've
worked in talent development and coaching and all that sort
of stuff and learned a lot through the years and
actually quite often now i'd spend my time apologizing to
anybody that I might have coached in the early days
because of all the mistakes that I make. But I
also so I didn't want, in my zeal and passion

(18:42):
and drive to sort of you know, support the development
of potential, to sort of allow that sort of adultified notion,
which is probably more the Sapling view. You know, this
is about preparation for some kind of amazing life you're
going to lead as an Olympian or whatever it might be.
I was always kind of but inctively, I've always always

(19:02):
been wanting to find the kind of the sweet spot,
you know, that what's the happy medium. There must be
a way of you know, supporting somebody on a journey
of self actualization without without sort of having to then
sacrifice you know, what is you know, a really really

(19:25):
important part of of growing up and my biggest fear,
and I always these are the kitchen table conversations I
would have with my wife. We're my biggest fear. I
distinctly remember her one day saying, given what you know
about coaching and talent development, shouldn't they be better than
they are? And we had to have a discussion about that,
and I had to say, well, yes, but my biggest

(19:46):
fear is that we'll grow up and as you often
see in the world of elite sport, where parental relationships
completely fragment and break down, or the individual who's sacri
their entire childhood, you know, kind of falls to pieces
in adulthood, you know, and completely loses you know, in

(20:07):
lots and lots of aspects of or examples of childhood
prodigies where that happens. And so, you know, my big
biggest fear was something like that occurring. And so I
was if I'm anything, if anything, more as hands off
as I could be, and much more about the creation
of environments that were playful and enjoyable and fun. And
my bias is still there, partially based on the idea

(20:29):
that you can't support the development of a child that
doesn't come back because they don't enjoy it. So I've
always been in that space of wanting to keep heat
the sports experience precious and as much as possible in
line the line for what you know young people would
want to do themselves, make it as playful as it
can be. But then the caterpillar of you then sort
of is is an attractive one for me now because

(20:53):
I've been searching for that view I suppose, which is
this idea that actually both phases of development are inly valuable.
What we're trying to do as much as possible is
to understand them as being inherently valuable and good and
then maximize them in whatever way possible. It opens up
some other discussions, obviously, and this is one of the

(21:14):
things fascinating paper. But the view itself is interesting because
I wonder sometimes if people uncritically, because of the way
the environment and the system and the messaging of the system,
the implicit messaging of the system, you know that you
need to be part of the pre academy and these
sorts of environments and things like that, where there's the

(21:35):
subtle messages being sent to parents in particular that actually
what you do now is critical if they're going to
make it in the future, and to a certain extent,
they're not necessarily then thinking about what is right for
or what is good for my child because this is
a precious moment. So I think they're being sucked into

(21:58):
the sapling view without realizing it.

Speaker 2 (22:00):
Perhaps, Yeah interesting, Yeah, yeah, yeah, I'd sort of make
two quick points in response to that. Then, Yeah, so
I think with the with this happening view, there would
definitely be a sense that if what yeah, as you
like nicely put it, if what really matters is adulthood
and childhood is just preparing us for that, then of
course whatever you impose on children, if it's for that

(22:22):
great good of you know, success in adulthood, then it's
justified because that is the purpose of childhood. So and
well maybe we'll come to this in a little bit,
but particularly when it comes to that attempt to kind
of maximize talent for say, let's so I call it
talent maximization for professional success. So you know, I want
my kid to be a Premier league footballer or a

(22:43):
you know, top twenty tennis player or whatever like that,
that kind of high level success. The amount of sacrifice
in childhood just seems to be huge, and I mean
kind of in a sense you would have a better
view of that as being on the ground, but from
what I can tell them, from what I can read,
it's massive and that level of sacrifice. If if childhood
is simply a preparation for adulthood and it doesn't matter
or it's justified because the whole point and the sense

(23:04):
of childhood is just being successful adults. I think this
appening with you absolutely pushes back on that. As you say,
and it says, well, no, what it's trying to it
is riding that balance because when we think about what
makes what what there When we think about what's good
for children, then that there are, it seems, two types
of things that are good. There are things that are

(23:26):
good for children as an intrinsic part of childhood. So
we could think of, say, and some of those some
of the kind of things that identified are unstructured play,
you know, free play, being carefree, or maybe something like
naivety or innocence or something. These are the things that
are kind of wonderful about childhood itself. But then there

(23:47):
are also things that are good for children, not necessary
that they benefit them in themselves, but they're good for
children because they will become adults. So there is you know,
we have to recognize that, of course one day they
will be adults, so we need to sort of so
we do impose things on children. You know, it might
be best for children as children just to eat like
sweets all day long, but of course we don't. We
impose the kind of mild cost and know, you will

(24:08):
eat broccoli and other stuff because that you will be
will help you develop in or you'll go to school.
You know, I'm sure childhood be far more enjoyable if
you're just you know, climbing trees all day. But actually
as you get older, yet you have to study. So
so the caterpil of you is trying to emphasize the
importance of the balance between Okay, we do want to
make sure that children have things that are intrinsically good

(24:28):
for them as children, but some of those things will
push against being kind of successful adults or flourishing in adulthood,
and so we also need to kind of there are
certain things for them that may be a cost to
them as children, but will kind of pay benefit dividends
in the future. And it's I don't know where the
balance lies in the sense. That was my kind of

(24:48):
interest in this paper because it seems that you are
and again maybe this we could kind of go into
this now, but in terms of really trying to maximize talent,
you're you're denying children quite a lot of those things
childhood intrinsically good for the hope to payoff in the future,
but it seems like that really is imposed and that

(25:09):
kind of cost. So then is you know, it's really
was thinking about is that justified? And as a parent,
am I willing to do that? Because as you said,
you know, if you're if if you're training every evening,
if you're training every weekend, you're not just running around
with friends, you know, with sticks, farming trees. It's just
not happening, you know, And that seems a significant sacrifice

(25:32):
or cost, but it might be justified. So yeah, anyway, Yeah.

Speaker 1 (25:37):
I'm glad you went to that framing of the intrinsic
and the instrumental goods actually, because that was something that
again piqued my interest, because I do wonder whether the
kind of shift has taken place or had had taken
place where the instrumental goods had become had almost become

(26:06):
perceived to being the most important, and the intrinsic goods
were then seen as subservient and had to be you know,
yes they are good, but they're only so good in
that you know that you know that they're actually a
bit frivolous. Really, you know, the instrumental goods are the importance.
And actually, when you start to think about it, and
this is where my mind went, you think about like

(26:27):
lots of aspects of Western society education, you know, where
a lot it seems to me like a lot of
the intrinsic goods, like the joy of childhood is being
stripped away because we have educational paradigms that basically say,
we want you to become a functioning part of a

(26:48):
neoliberal economy. And I think some people, which is what
you know, you're starting to see increasing amounts of homeschooling,
and you're starting to see increasing amounts of people wanting
to take different educational decisions and all those sorts of things.
And I think some of that stems from the fact
that people are beginning to question whether this approach to

(27:09):
education is really that valuable to young people. And I
think a lot of people went through a reappraisal during
the pandemic when and I think children did. And the
interesting thing I think a lot of people experienced when
children came back to sport, for example, is that young
people came back with a very different mindset. I think.
Whereas previously they would have been, you know, more prepared

(27:32):
to just sort of go along with whatever was provided,
they actually were a bit more. They were vocalizing their
distaste for you know, conformity and all these things that
they were kind of forced into. It's quite interesting how
that sort of materialized over a period of time. Anyway,
I'm digressing slightly, but yeah, So this idea of instrumental

(27:52):
and intrinsic goods and I think that's where a lot
of the debate happens. So, you know, there's obviously a
big debate in social media, but there's a lot of
around which is primary, you know, which which has primacy.
And I believe that messaging very very I think, well,
it could be deliberate. I don't know, but like you

(28:12):
know that there is there is messaging towards parents everywhere
and to children which creates stress and mental health epidemic,
whereby basically saying your only job as a child is
to become a functioning adult. And my fear is that
all of this messaging is actually actively working against children

(28:34):
becoming functioning adults, because they become functioning adults with so
many hang ups and fears and stressors and all these
sorts of things that it actively works against the goals
it's supposed to achieve. Mm hmmm.

Speaker 2 (28:48):
Interesting. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, I mean that that that
may well be right. That seems very plausible. Yeah, and
I think I don't want to say that that. Yeah,
So I was, yeah, there's there's there's really nice. So
a lot of the kind of there was a great
book by I think it's called Tom Ferry called Game On.

(29:09):
It's focused on America, but it's he it's documenting the
sort of intensification you might say, of sort of sports
development in America, the kind of absolute sort of that
the huge increase of time and demands on children in
order to succeed. So, you know, not only a children
starting to you know, specialize in a sport at a
younger age, there's more time demanded of them and these

(29:30):
sorts of things. And he speaks to lots of parents
and lots of children of lots of different sports in
America And one of the interviews that really struck me
was with it was a pair of it was two
children who played hockey, and the mother was talking about
and this goes through their that their kind of standard
week and you know, literally like every evening, every afternoon,

(29:52):
then three or four, two or three games a week day,
Saturday and Sundays like their entire life anyway, And she's
got this this kind of amazing line where she just says,
let children be children? Is that even possible anymore? And
that really struck with me because she's essentially saying like,
we can't. I can't let my child be a child,
as in have a childhood, because if I do that,

(30:16):
they won't have a chance at succeeding in in, you know,
they won't be a professional hockey player. And that in
a sense that in that one sense is kind of
some I suppose some not the whole interest in the
paper is like, well, in a sense, we can let
children be children, we just we don't go in for
that kind of talent development factory machine that these children
being plugged into. But almost also struck me is that

(30:39):
she she almost didn't see it as a choice, as in,
if I want the best of my children, then actually,
this is what I have to do for them, because
in the sense that seems me a bit of a
real Sapling view, because for her, the best for her
children was giving them the chance to succeed in adulthood
like that, and that just meant that I give up
on them having a childhood. But in a sense that's

(31:00):
justified if the goal of parenting is yeah, you've made
it as an adult, and that's my job, that's my
sole job is getting you there. And I suppose I
was a bit troubled by that because I thought, no,
that is that is absolutely sacrificing all the things that
make childhood great as a childhood in and of itself.

(31:22):
You know.

Speaker 1 (31:24):
Yeah, Confarry is amazing. Actually he set up something called
the ass well no, he works at the Aspen Institute
and set up something called Project Play and managed to
build together like a coalition of organizations. I mean we're
talking hundreds who kind of signed up across the States

(31:45):
to like, you know, going to buy into this sort
of manifesto that it created, which was around bringing play
back to the sports experience for young people, which is
really interesting. I was very, very influenced by what pomd
did with Project Play, and so when I was at

(32:05):
Sports England, I'd always had this goal of trying to
create a some form of a campaign that would maybe
advocate for an alternative view, probably more the fruit view
maybe or even the caterpillar view. I wish i'd kind
of known about the fruit and the caterpillar of view actually,

(32:27):
because I wish I still have got your paper sooner,
because and I think when I wrote to you to
invite you on, I said, where's this paper? Been? All
my life? But I and just to sort of explain
that a little bit more. I also I've also felt
for a long time that coaches and practitioners have this

(32:48):
dilemma because they I think are torn. And you used
to use the great analogy a minute ago where you
talked about eating sweets or eating brocol and funnily enough,
one of the slides that I use all the time
in pretty much every workshop that I do is I
put exactly that up. I put junk food and broccoli

(33:10):
and say that the dilemma for most coaches working with
young people who are on some sort of coming along
to sports experiences with a range of different motivations and
some of them are hoping that they may be able
to do some level of progression to some imaginary future
state that you know, maybe they could achieve something or

(33:32):
whatever it might be exploring the boundaries of their potential health.
Would say, And so you've got this kind of dual duty,
the duty to provide a great experience that's really positive
and enriching. And part of you know, it's very much
seeing the sort of intrinsic childhood goods, but you've also
got a duty to provide an experience that's going to

(33:52):
be enriching in a way that would be instrumental to
their future development. And it's a really big dilemma because
often it's seen as a little bit of a dichotomy.
And so what all the coaches end up doing is
they end up sort of saying, well, I'm on this
is largely I think because of pressure. So some parental pressure,
particularly if the parent's paying for the activity, but also

(34:15):
pressure from governing bodies or pressure from society and pressure
from everywhere else in the world. Educated that we know
that actually what they need to do is they need
to mirror those worlds and so basically put instrumental goods
ahead of intrinsic goods and sacrifice the intrinsic goods. So
what you often will then see is activity forms being

(34:38):
chosen because the coach is saying, I'm making an active
choice that I'm going to do the things they're going
to be instrumentally better for these young people, even if
it means that we have to sacrifice good And the
most simple example of that is if you watch vast
majority of coaching sessions, there will be basically, you have
to eat your broccoly first to get your dessert, which

(34:59):
is the game. Right, So you've got to have your
nutritious stuff, which is, you know, your drills and your
exercises and your stuff which might not be that much fun,
it's a bit boring, and then we're gonna have a
game at the end. That's the reward, you know. And
I've been campaigning that, you know, why can't kids have
the have the dessert at the start, right and at
the end, and why not all way through it? To

(35:19):
be honest anyway, So I often refer to this as
if you've got junk food and you've got broccoli burgers
and broccoli we need broccoli burgers. I'm yet to invent
the recipe, but surely there's a way for us to
find a modality that's enriching. It retains all of the

(35:41):
important intrinsic goods of childhood and is instrumental to their developments.
And I believe, and I've been a campaigner for a
long time, I believe that play and the utilization skillful,
utible utilization of playing through things like designer games can
actually be really instrumental in creation of good almost almost

(36:03):
recreating the street games that kids used to play when
they were allowed to play on streets and they gardening
more and almost creating those sorts of environments. So that's
been the sort of big advocacy moment. But the campaign
that we created, we based it on rights. So we
took a rights based view. So we took the un
Convention of the Rights of the Child because it had
so much power, you know, as a rights framework. And

(36:27):
not all of the rights out of all forty two
articles are necessarily relevant, but the ones that we felt
were relevant to the sports experiences for children were the
right to play, the right to an appropriate developmental experience,
the right to be free of discrimination abuse, which you
would think would be you know, go without saying, but

(36:49):
sadly doesn't. Oh, and the right to a voice in
you know, the right to be heard in the experience
they're going. And we articulate that as to keep it's
simple and people can refer to it as a voice
choice journey. And the campaign is called Play Their Way,
which is starting to take a little bit of hold,
you know, slowly but surely, and is being led by

(37:11):
a coalition of organizations and you know, kind of trying
to sort of create this moment of reappraisal counterculture. I
think it's Sir Darthur Muckerjee said, in order to counter culture,
you need counterculture. So what we're just doing is we're
not saying this is wrong, like if you're only working
with instrumental goods and you're sacrificing some of the intrinsic goods,
that that's actually wrong. What we're saying is there's an

(37:33):
alternative perception out there or a way of thinking about this,
and we want people to be able to make give
choices because what we found was that there was a
lot of coaches out there who felt a bit powerless
because when they did when they operated using a way
that was more seemed more intrinsically good. They were ridiculed
as being you know, you're just woke intruders. His actual terms.

(37:57):
Andy Pitchford from Cheltenham actually talked about that as in
his research. It's been on the podcast and actually they
so they articulated that way. So those people felt a
bit alone, like I feel really really powerfully that this
is an important way to work, but they felt quite alone.
So the idea was to try and sort of create
community and understand that actually you're with other people out
there and actually this is just an alternative paradigm that

(38:20):
might be small and niche sadly, but could still be
given a voice and should be given a place in
the sporting landscape. Sorry rambling on forever, but just thought
it might be useful to understand that backdrop.

Speaker 2 (38:31):
Yeah, no, that's really interesting and certainly that that emphasis
on play and games, you know that again another thing
that kind of came out in the research I was
doing that a lot of inties with children, but often
talk about how at a certain point when they were
being pushed to really kind of maximize that their talent,
that you know, the actor, sport, the activity they're involved in,

(38:52):
cease to be they'd cease to see it as play
or as a game, as fun, and it became, you know,
something else, and then there was the pressure. It was,
you know, it was the route into you were trying
to be a professional footballer, and you weren't just playing
football and now almost became a sense of kind of
being a profession. And again that if we think that
what matters intrinsically for a childhood is having that sense

(39:15):
of kind of care free play, particularly with other children,
that you're playing games together. And suddenly if you're you know,
if there's that kind of intensification of training and coaching
and sport talent development, you're not just playing with other children,
know the other children and how kind of competitors you
have to be better than, and suddenly you are your
relationship with other children is perhaps being distorted. So there

(39:36):
were some of the worries I was trying to sort
of raise and highlight in the paper, and so I
was wondering, for your perspective, how much, as someone with
experience on the ground in that regard, how much did
that ring through. Do you think that there is a
sense that if we're overly focused on trying to not
just nurture children's talent, but actually kind of max to
make to maximize their talents so they could succeed professionally

(39:58):
in the future. Do you think that is kind of
corrupting the idea of game and play or having a
corrupting effect.

Speaker 1 (40:05):
Without doubt, And this goes back to the point I
made about the coach's dilemma around what do I do
the things that I believe are going to be the
most nourishing, regardless of whether they are at cractive. You know,
So basically kids are almost being force fed broccoly, and
the coaches are having to force feed them broccoly even

(40:25):
though they know it's not very nice, because they feel
like that's the only thing that they should be doing
in order to maximize their potential. And there's actually a
whole body of research around skill acquisition which stems from
a branch of psychology called ecological psychology, which articulates actually
that playful experiences are some of the most powerful drivers

(40:48):
of skilled performance. So actually, if you drip out play
from child experiences, what you're actually doing is you're stripping
out the nourishments. You think you're not right, but you're
it's like so much overprocessed food. You know, it's got
none of the nourishment left. It's just you know, and
so actually what they're that that's it's a strange, almost

(41:12):
counterintuitive thing that you know, coaches feel like they're and
probably even parents are choosing experiences for kids that are
robbed of these child you know, intrinsic childhood goods, play
carefulness of this, that and the other, because they're seen
as being frivolous when in actual fact that's probably the
worst thing that you could do. If part of your

(41:32):
thinking was about telemnximization.

Speaker 2 (41:35):
That's interesting. Yeah, yeah, that's very interesting. And actually just
just on that as well. The other I think important
implication of that, that caterpillar of you that that we
really think of about a childhood and adult it's just
different sort of things different is that you can't make
up for the loss in adulthood, all right, So there's
you know that that way which you know, the idea

(41:57):
of so another childhood good ise have just significant free time,
like significant and care free time. It's time where you
don't have any duties, any responsibilities, you're completely you know,
you just have the whole weekend to do whatever you want.
And and that's an intrinsic good of childhood. That makes
childhood good is not having any demands on your time.
And similarly, you know, play games the way we as

(42:20):
adults just can't do that. And so you can't say
to the child that I'm going to sacrifice your childhood
now to try and make your professional football, but hey,
don't worry if it doesn't work out. You can have
all of that in adulthood. An important point of the
Sapling view is you can't, like you can't you don't
get that in adulthood, either because it's just not possible,
or actually there's something about being an adult. There's something

(42:42):
about being a child and the way in which they
play with other children that just adults don't seem able
to do. So, so the loss is kind of compounded
by the fact that it can't be made up for
in adulthood. So that I think that was a kind
of an additional point I wanted to make in terms
of when we think about these goods of child and
what make childhood good, the loss is particularly significant for

(43:04):
those things that can only be experienced and enjoyed in childhood.
And it certainly seems that those those dimensions of you know,
care freeness and a lack of responsibility, you know, just playing,
just having fun. If there's too I worry there's too
much pressure pressure placed on children to succeed, to be
the best, to make it, you know, if you're signing

(43:24):
at seven for you know, some academy club, like the
pressure on you already did that seems that especially troubling
because you'll never again be able to not have any
worries or can sex, you know, concerns in that regard.
So so any, Yeah, I just wanted to add that
as an additional additional point, so so I can ask
again kind another question. I'll be interested in your view

(43:46):
and this So so it seems that you've you knows,
when you think about children who kind of possessed you know,
who are so very good at things, who possessed talents
with things, it seems so what I would want to
I wanted to draw distinction between saying, yeah, it's really
good to develop children's talents. That seems in a kind
of enriching thing and it's good for children, And there's
lots of interesting research on how developing your skills and

(44:08):
abilities is kind of both intrinsically and instrumentally good. It
seems that there's that tipping point where it ceases to
be about a child developing their talents to become in
a sense, to develop themselves as they are, to become
good at what they can be good at, versus more

(44:29):
that more focused, intensified form of talent development where the
purpose is not in a sense to develop the child,
but for the child to succeed in adulthood. That that
the kind of lenses on we're trying to develop you
to be the best you can, not simply be the
best you can, but simply to be the best, to
be better than everyone else. So you'll then, you know,

(44:49):
get your professional contract when you're eighteen or whatever. You'll
be the next Trent Alexander Arnold or something like that.
And it seems to me there's a really there's a
what I don't want to be seen as be anti
talent development that that seems really important. It's great for
children to you know, become very good at stuff. That's
both you know, it's intrinsically rewarding to be really good
at an activity. They're also good social benefits. It's you know,

(45:14):
gives you a social sense of socialist, sense of self
esteem and these sorts of things. But but it seems
that there's really at a point where we would I suppose, yeah,
the Ultimate Warrior had was that really were in a
point where that's gone so fun, that so many parents
are so focused on children not just developing themselves but succeeding,

(45:34):
where success is defined by becoming a professional athlete, becoming
professional sports person. So I suppose that what what one is?
Just to kind of clarify, I'm not not trying to
be anti talent development, but I suppose, how do you
how do you protect that or you know, how can
we ward off that the kind of more detrimental talent

(45:56):
maximization you might say, from beneficial really valuable talent development.
Does that make sense as the question?

Speaker 1 (46:04):
Yeah? Completely, And you know, I feel like this is
a series of podcasts to unlock this one. But I
suppose my immediate response is so, I you know, I
run a podcast and a consultancy that is pretty much
focused on answering that question and has been, and that's

(46:29):
really been that sort of exploit exploratory journey that I've
been on for a number of years. Some of that
stems from the fact that I was placed in this
situation myself. So I distinctly remember a number of years
ago the governing body within field hockey in the UK

(46:53):
and England created a new talent framework and part of
that was they had all these sort of what they
called junior development centers, and in these junior development centers,
young people would arrive and they would spend hours and
hours and hours lined up in queues waiting for their

(47:13):
turn to perform a technically perfect movement over and over
again round cones. So you know, very little play, you know.
It was purely and simply about, you know, maximizing technical execution.
And the idea was this was the entry point to
the talent pathway, and we were putting fundamental they called

(47:37):
them skills. They weren't skills, they were techniques, fundamental techniques
in place that were then going to be the building
blocks for future expert performance. And I didn't know at
the time that that's what was happening in these environments,
but I kind of signed up and said, yes, I'll
help out in this talent pathway. And I went to

(47:57):
one session and said, if this is what we're doing here,
I'm not going to carry on doing this because it's
horrendous for them, and it's equally horrendous for me. I
can't watch them doing it, and I find it horre tedious,
so it's like a double whammy for me. It was like,
you know, every single red flag was going off, you know, so,

(48:22):
and I opted out that point, and then years later
I re entered the talent pathway had a little bit
higher up the chain, but largely because the philosophy had
shifted away from this sort of factory industrialized fat pory
farm style of skill developments to much more of a enriching,

(48:49):
exploratory mac you know, kind of strength based it used
for talent maximization, but you know, it was really about saying,
how do we help you, as with individuals, to individually
maximize your capability by creating safe to fail environments where
you're free to experiment. Where you may not have that

(49:10):
in a selective environment or in a schooling environment where
you know, results matter and all that sort of stuff,
you may not get that experience. We're going to provide
an experience in the talent system where you genuinely have
that freedom. And that was some of the most enriching
coaching I've ever done, and I hope and I like
to think that the young people who were part of
that environment really benefited from it as well, and so

(49:34):
philosophically I could align with that. So the reason I'm
telling you that story is because I think nowadays, even nowadays,
there are still a lot of organizations working from a
paradigm whereby the again, you know, this notion of the
instrumental goods take primacy over the intrinsic goods, so that

(49:58):
the intrinsic goods have to be sacked in order to match.
And the problem you have now as well is that
because of expertise research like Ericsson's stuff around deliberate practice
and ten thousand hours and these sorts of things that
became you know, almost a semi justification that we need
to start earlier and earlier in the race to the bottom.

(50:21):
And children who are still thinking about, you know, what
the easter Bundy might bring them in a few weeks
time are being asked to you know, essentially enter workhouses
and to commit you know, so they you know, and
they travel distant, so they're becoming experts at traveling in cars.
And I'll tell you the most horrific I don't know

(50:41):
if you saw or managed to catch anything around the
what happened in gymnastics where in America there was the
athlete a controversy which then came over here, and then
multiple gymnasts, I say multiple hundreds of gymnasts came forward
in a kind of me too style, basically lamenting their
experiences as gymnasts, which then caused a significant, extensive, very

(51:06):
expensive review to be conducted about the culture within gymnastics,
and many of the elements that came out of that review,
the White Review, really really pointed to some malpractice. But
in particular, one of the things that I will never
forget reading that review, three hundred and twenty odd pages
of it, was the story of a young girl who

(51:28):
I think she may have been eight, who would get
up at five am to get to the gym to
do an hour and a half two hours of training,
eat breakfast in the car on the get changed, eat
breakfast in the car on the way to school, get
picked up from school at three o'clock, goes straight to
the bite to eat, straight to the gym, train until

(51:49):
around about eight o'clock, come home, homework, if that's relevant,
feed eating in the car on the way home and
doing that four or five times a week because that's
what it takes. So that is somebody who has essentially
had any aspect of carefree play time on their own,

(52:10):
all of those sorts of things completely and utterly ripped
away from their childhood because that's what it takes. And
then there's various degradation, various gradations of that happening elsewhere,
you know, where kids at six or seven, or you've
got to enter the training squad. Now it's sixteen hours
a week of contact time, all of these sorts of
things for some sort of imaginary future that really only

(52:34):
manifests for very few and even then even those that
actually do make it, once they actually get there and
do what they need to do, and then they retire
in you know, and you know they're kind of used
up by age twenty eight or whatever it is, then
a face into the rest of their lives and go
what was all that for? And that's increasingly starting to

(52:54):
happen as well. So there's this almost it feels to
me like there is like this almost reappraisal take making
place where people are looking at the world of sport
and saying, what are we doing this for.

Speaker 2 (53:06):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, absolutely, I mean there are yeah,
there are so many I think kind of extreme, deeply
troubling examples of that, you know, like they I think
I was reading in America they have have kind of
international golf competitions, you know, under fives, under sixes, you know,
and there was a family from China that brought their
kid over like six or seven to spend the summer

(53:26):
just playing the golf. Cirde it, and you think, you know,
there's you don't you know, so many parents are like,
we don't have holidays, Like we can't have holidays. That's
like that's time. And if we do go away, it's
all built around continuing the training process. So you know,
you think these so I suppose that yeah, yeah, their
little partner just think, God, these poor children know they're
just being they're just being put through this kind of

(53:47):
machine of kind of coaching development for this promised goal
of you know, and I suppose the one I suppose
in a sense trying to understand from the parental perspective.
And this is why try and frame it as a
dilemma that of course you can see, you know, we
see spessional footballers and they earn insane, you know, in
comprehensible amounts of money, they have feigned status, they have

(54:10):
you know, from a certain perspective, they have everything you
could want from adulthood. So that is that that is
the kind of carrot. That's the lure, isn't it that
you think your child could be the next whoever? And
and in sense part so that I start the paper,
there's a really fascinating interview with Trent Alexander Ronald in

(54:31):
the Guardian newspaper that came out a few years ago,
and he was actually trying to a part of the
interview is to highlight the impact on children who don't
make it. So he talks about lots of the kids
that he went through, you know, the Liverpool Academy with
who even at you know, twelve thirteen were much better
than him. And then because in the sense it seems
like the talent develops a bit unpredictable, then they just
they didn't make it. They dropped out. And he was

(54:51):
trying to say, look, we we never there's a there's
a kind of visibility problem here that we only see
the successful one, all right, So of course we only
see the athletes who make it or the sports people
who make it, and you know, as apparently might think, God,
that looks pretty nice for my kid, like that, that
looks really tempting. You know, what you don't see is
the ninety nine point nine percent of people who don't
make it. And and and that again that problem of

(55:15):
you know, you you sacrifice everything, you hit eighteen, you
don't get a contract, you drop out, or you know,
you maybe get a contract for a year, get an
injury or something. By nineteen twenty, you know you where
are you know what? You've lost everything you haven't got,
you know. And so another thing I go through in
the paper is just the sheer improbability of success like this.

(55:37):
You know you, of course everyone there's probably a slight
kind of everyone thinks their parent that every parent probably
thinks their child is a bit better than other two.
You know, we all like to think that. You know,
everyone thinks they're a better drive than everyone else. Everyone
thinks their child is a bit more handed than everyone else.
Of course, you probably there's almost unconscious bias towards your
own kids that of course you think they could make it.

(55:57):
And again I was trying to say, well, even if
you think that, like that you know, the sacrifice you're
making is not only really great in none of itself,
but the probability of that paying off it's just it's
infintestingly small. So again sort to really sort of not
to say that it's wrong if you do that, but
I just think if you're going to push your kid

(56:19):
through that route, you should at least be as you know,
you should be aware of the odds of success and
these sorts of things that it's it's just statistically not
going to happen, even if they're brilliant it well.

Speaker 1 (56:31):
And also, I mean, it's a gold rush. You know,
everybody thinks they're going to find the mind with all
the gold in it. So because the rewards are seemingly
so huge that so for some people, the rewards are
so huge that the the process it's you know, it

(56:53):
is it overrides any other aspects. And it's the economics
of it that are huge, huge driver. Particularly and this
is the worst bit about it. The more vulnerable you
are as a family, the more likely you're going to
be drawn into this world. And it's one of the
reasons why this is this you know, this whole podcast

(57:15):
exists to be able to take great you know, writing
like yours, and make it more accessible to people who
would otherwise maybe not come across it. You know, and
I work in this field and I haven't come across it,
So of course I want to make sure more people
can hear about it and share it with others. Which
is why people who are listening to this podcast should
like and subscribe and share this to everybody else, he says,
doing a quick plug. But I what I was going

(57:38):
to say was, I think the the challenge I think
for me is that it goes back to your point.
We're not anti talent development, anti talent maximization. There is
an intrinsic good in stretching yourself and challenging yourself and

(58:00):
trying to see how good you can become at something
and exploring that whilst you're in childhood and you have
the opportunity to do that, genuine opportunity for exploration and
to you know, and so and to do all those
sorts of things, and you know, if you have the
resources available to you, then that's you know, even better
and all those sorts of things. So there's nothing inherently

(58:20):
wrong with exploring the boundaries of your potential it's how
you do it that matters. And that's what and the
problem you have, you see, is because there's a lack
of understanding and education amongst practitioners, amongst policymakers, and amongst
parents themselves, and there's a lack of criticality in terms
of the way they think. You know, there's no thinking tools,

(58:44):
which is one of those I really like about paper.
It gives you thinking tools in the form of metaphors
to say, look, may just make an active choice, you know,
And I've said I've always said this about like talent
selection and talent you know, environments. You want care and
young people to have a voice and a choice in

(59:05):
their journey, going back to voice choice journey at every
stage of your talent journey, if they actively, with all
the information in front of them, say we want to
go down this route, you know, the kind I think
you make reference to the tiger mother in the paper
that you know that the parent whose view is you know,

(59:26):
it's all about you know, this sort of stuff that's
your your I'm not going to moralize about a parent's
worldview around what they believe is good for them and
their children and their family and all those sorts of things.
That's not my job. My job is to make them
aware of the potential outcomes of particular choices so that
they can navigate that with as much skill as they

(59:47):
possibly can. And that's you know, and so that's that's
I guess the point of this conversation, which is to say,
there are ways of doing this or with their pros
and cons, all with difficulties and challenges, and there's no
one way for every single person. Just be mindful of
the fact that there are a number of ways of

(01:00:08):
thinking about it that probably will help you as navigational
tools as you go down this journey, because you're gonna otherwise,
you're just going to get buffeted around by the winds
of change and you're you're powerless. And this is about
putting more agency and power back in the hands of
young people and their parents.

Speaker 2 (01:00:23):
Mm hmmm good, yeah, yeah, yeah, no, I mean, in
many ways, it couldn't agree more, did I I would
pick up one small point this have of interest and
so often not necessary to kind of disagree, but just
to kind of push a little bit. So so you
did mention kind of talent maximization and that you know,
it's not being against that I suppose I do have
a very kind of social cultural worry about this, this

(01:00:46):
idea of maximization, that that it that it can lend
itself to a to a kind of so it can
lend usselfs to maybe an over and over focus on
one particular thing. So like, you're very good at playing
the piano, and my purpose, as apparent is to help
you maximize that. And I think, well, actually, it's all
right just to be pretty good, Like it's alright this

(01:01:08):
to do pretty well. I'm sort of slightly critical in
the paper of this this focus on maximization, because it
lends itself too much to a kind of over demandingness
or that that should be that you know, if you
haven't maximized, you've failed in some way where you've not succeeded.
And I think maybe it's about kind of trying to
push back a little bit on that and say, you know,

(01:01:28):
it's great, great to develop, but let's not let's not
think about that because in the sense that there could
always be a sense you could always be a bit better,
like you could always push yourself a bit more, you
could always practice a bit harder, you know, No, And
I think at some point you say, yeah you can.
Maybe it's better to be to a certain you know,
there's that, you know, jack of all trades, master of
a nun like, maybe that is not a bad thing,

(01:01:49):
you know, Like it's alright to say, fine, I'll be
pretty good at that, But I'm also quite good at this,
So I suppose I worry them way in which a
focus on maximization can lend to a kind of you
might call it like a monomania, a focus on one
thing and one thing alone. That that is, that's your
that's your talent. You are brilliant a football and there
you go. Maybe very good at lots of things is fine.

Speaker 1 (01:02:12):
That's good point. And jack of all trades, master of
none is is pretty much the best way to describe
me in every facet of my life, partly because I'm
so distractable that I just get really curious about all
sorts of things. So I am that kid who was
pretty good at everything, but never very good at anything.

(01:02:33):
It's true, I describe myself as a neo generalist now
in my in my other life, because I've just got
so many interests and I just almost can't stay focused
long enough on any one. So I'm with you on
the idea of this sort of more holistic view and
also the it's not it actually doesn't serve you that well.

(01:02:55):
Lots of research to suggest this, by the way, again,
and this is where the sort of counterintuitive thing, you know.
So there's lots of research around specialization and the point
of specialization, and the earlier you specialize, there is an
inverse correlation with the progression that you make because you
need the other variables to sort of you need the
variables of maturation and all of these other elements to

(01:03:16):
sort of factor in. So the idea being is is
that you have as broad a experience as possible and
then the specialization point comes later. But that's becoming, you know,
go back to the parent who said, is that even possible?
It's extremely difficult to not hyper specialize because all the

(01:03:36):
systems are forcing you to. Like I had to make
active choices to withdraw one of my children from the
entry point to the pathway because it was at nine
and it meant sacrificing other activities that he found inherently enjoyable. Well,
we're not doing that, then that's staffed. I'm not going
to spend time and money and energy on you doing

(01:03:58):
something the excuse you from doing all these other things.
Now that may have been you know that for all
I know, and I've got no out outcomes, maybe detrimental,
you know, in terms of his development. Man, It's definitely
true in some respects because being in the pathway gives
you more resources, gives you more support, gives you more
maximization possibilities. It means you're in the shop window and

(01:04:19):
people are seeing you and clocking you and moving you
up the journey, and you know, and so the Matthew
effect kicks in. And so I'm a big advocate to actually,
if I had a magic wand, I would say no
talent system entry points should be allowed until at least
some points in postmaturation, when young people have entered secondary school,

(01:04:42):
they've started to make choices about career, you know, options
and things like that. So that's it seems like a
point in time where they are capable of making some
more active choices about how they want to apportion their time.
I'm very proud of some work we've been in England,
Rugby actually where we actually the Talent Consensus Statement, using

(01:05:02):
an approach that the world of medicine and medical ethics utilizes.
And actually off the back of that, a policy decision
was made that the entry point of the talent pathway
was going to be fourteen and still not quite postmaturation,
but certainly closer to it. And that still stands to
this day. And I'm so I was really proud of

(01:05:22):
some stuff that we did there which was going against
the grain, because Rugby was going down that race to
the bottom world as well. And so, you know, so
I think, weirdly, I think there are some policy shifts
that could be made by supporting organizations that would really
help parents with some of the dilemma. Yeah, if that

(01:05:43):
makes sense at all.

Speaker 2 (01:05:44):
No, absolutely, And I think you're I think that's really
important that you know, in the sense that the the
solution is not just for parents to make different choices,
but for the context in which they're making those choices
to change, because, as you say, whilst we have this
real kind of arms race to the bottom, you know,
they must start younger and train harder and did it.
And if you don't do that, you're failing as a parent.
But in a sense of course, within that system, you are,

(01:06:06):
within the terms of the system, you are if you
know so in sense, you're right, it's not as much
like called it a print or a dilemma. It's clearly
a social dilemma. And the way of helping or dissolving
the parental dilemma is to change the context of choice.
And yeah, as you say there is that there does
seemn important pushback on that idea of specialization you know,

(01:06:28):
younger and more intense. Yeah, you mentioned that the tiger mother,
and you know, obviously a lot you'll know as well
as anyone, like a lot of that goes. Yeah, that
that model of tiger woods that you know, age two,
he's being put in his high chair and watching his
dad just do golf swings. By age three, you know,
like if you're not doing that, there's that weird narrative
you're not doing that, then then you've ruined their chances,

(01:06:49):
Like that's it, they'll never make it, and that that
just seems false. Then I can understand just a misunderstanding
of actually how children develop sporting abilities of other things.
It's not as if you haven't turned the tap on
by three or four. It's like it's never that's it,
you know, it's it. But that's a really dominant narrative.
It seems that that once parents buy into then that's it.

(01:07:10):
They're kind of trapped in that that perspective of well,
if I don't do this, I'm failing them as and
I suppose again part of the paper is to say, well,
if you don't do that, you're not you're certainly not
failing them as children. You know, if you're going for
the other route of man no, like just just just play,
just don't worry about it, and I do whatever you want.
You're three or four years old. You may worry you're

(01:07:31):
failing them as adults in denying them that singular opportunity
of success. But I think that that's all all so
false that you know, if they don't stop playing till
seven or eight or nine, they could still make it.
You know, I think that that idea of Tantaman is
probably wrong. But as I say, you're certainly not failing
them as children if you don't go for that that route.

Speaker 1 (01:07:50):
One hundred percent. And again that goes back to this
point that I made around sort of what what was
my guide? My guide was I I would rather fail
them in achieving whatever this thing could be than fail
them in their childhood. That would be. That was my calculus.

(01:08:14):
And interestingly, though I worked in golf for about eight
years and I was doing clent development in golf, sort
of where I started my kind of career a little
bit in talent space. And there's some interesting stuff about
Tiger and that people don't necessarily know, so that you're right,
this sort of media narrative is really really powerful. So

(01:08:35):
the story of the prodigy, the phenomen is so so powerful,
so alluring, the media jump on it and it becomes
you know, almost like self fulfilling, extremely difficult to push against,
you know, becomes culturally resilient. But so what people don't

(01:08:56):
know about Tiger's upbringing was it was a rock. So
Earl knew enough forever reason to find the right coach
for his what he considered to be his prodigious son,
and took him to a guy called Rudy Durant. And
Rudy Durant who I got to meet, and I asked

(01:09:17):
him a couple of questions very deliberately, this particular seminar
that he was running. So Rudy Duran ran ran a
golf facility. He was a coach and he ran the
golf facility and it was a nine hot an eighteen
hole PA three golf facility, and he was able to

(01:09:38):
sort of block out the course in the mornings to
be able to do lessons. And what Tiger had was
Tiger would play golf with Rudy Durant and Earl every
Saturday morning, so play eighteen holes. And what Rudy would do,
this is his description. He said, he would wait for
the coachable moments, so you would see something the Tiger

(01:10:00):
struggled to do, and then they would have a coaching moment.
And I said to him, so, how much time did
you spend, like on the range working on his swing
and stuff, and how much time did you spend on
the course, And he said, it's like eighty five percent
of the time was on the golf course. We only
ever went to the range if we found something on
the golf course that Tiger wanted to be able to
try and get better at, because he had the range

(01:10:21):
to master and then and then he would then so rudely,
then would they go and work on the range on
this particular problem that is the absolute inverse of the
vast majority of young people's golfing experiences, where they would
start in a environment learning swings and techniques, and then

(01:10:42):
they'd go and play golf much much much later. And
so what Tiger had the benefit of was playing golf,
learning the game with somebody as a guide, not providing
him with lots of technical information, but giving him guidance
as and when it needed, and then working on technicalities
because there was a problem that emerged in the environment.

(01:11:05):
So it was play had a playful you know, from
the age of about five to the age of nine ten,
he played golf with somebody guiding his journey, somebody who
was skillful enough to know not to get in the way.
Like it's the ideal model really of childhood development. Now
it just so happens that then that then translates into
then a whole load of other things, and it, you know,

(01:11:26):
and it manifests itself in a whole load of experiences
for Tiger himself that have been really, really detrimental to
the rest of his life. And that's partly just to
do with the whole industry that built built up. But
nonetheless that's a story that people don't realize. So if
you want the example of the oh, you've got to

(01:11:46):
start with serious training at the age of three and
four in order to make it actually playful. Experiences at
the ages of four or five and six are probably
the most important thing that you can abide for your child.
If part of what you're thinking is let's see how
far they can go in this?

Speaker 2 (01:12:06):
To me mmmmm, interesting, yeah, yeah, but just do you
think there's I say again comes out to the systemic thing.
Do you think that part of the problem then is
that again pushing against that is the idea that right,
if you're not on the team by four or five,
then you won't get the chance to go into the
you're not in the system, right, so you have to
sort of progress from that to get And again if

(01:12:28):
you think in America, like the way which goes through
the college system, that unless you're in the kind of
youth team at eight, you won't get into the tens.
And so again it put that part of the problems
that systemic that the portrayal of the necessary journey through
that unless you started at two or three in this way,
you're just not going to get to that that you know,
you won't get your college scholarship, and then you won't

(01:12:50):
and you know again Tom tom Ferry's book is fascinating
for talking to parents who really brought into that. So
that idea that if I don't I don't go. There's
there's one route and that route starts at three or four.
If I don't go through that route, that's it. And
it's amazing how powerful that that that kind of grip
on parents and that narrative.

Speaker 1 (01:13:06):
Is yeah, one hundred percent. And you're totally right as well.
By the way, there are some really big economic drivers.
So in the UK, for example, you know, ah, well,
we want to get a scholarship into this prep school
because then that will help us to have the independent
education that we want for our children that we can't
actually afford. So let's get them trained up in a
sport so they can get a sports scholarship into the

(01:13:28):
prep school or into the independent school that we want
them to go into. So we put them into hardcore
sports training to get there so that they look a
million dollars and they can get this sports scholarship and
get them on. That's a very real thing. So the
economics and massive drivers of these sorts of ideas as well.
And it's and that's one of the reasons why you know,
you start to see the growth of you know, individuals

(01:13:51):
who provide one on one training for some people, you know,
with the promise of you know, you'll become an academy
prospect or you know, you'll get the scholarship for this,
and you'll get the route to that, and you'll get
you know, university scholarships in the States, which is why
sport is becoming increasingly, you know, an industrialized complex worth
billions and billions, particularly in the US, but certainly increasingly

(01:14:13):
becoming more. And that's the danger, isn't it Because those incentives,
there are so many misaligned incentives to fight against it.
You know, I felt this pressure myself. Fighting against these
misaligned incentives is really really challenging, which is one of
the reasons I think at paper is so important because,
like I said, you know, it gives those thinking tools,

(01:14:33):
those reference points, and a way of asking the question, right,
you know, how do you want to see like childhood?
How many? And I do think it's a bit of
a wake up call for a lot of parents. Actually
they get they might actually act you know what, No, actually,
now now you mention it, I don't know if this
is what I have been thinking is actually right. And actually,
let's face it, the majority of people's thinking is just

(01:14:55):
influenced by societal factors, media, et cetera. Actually, then they
have a chance to stop and think and go, oh,
hang on a second, it's just the right and a
lot of people I think instinctively feel awkward about it,
but don't really know how to hackle it. So actually,
I think these kinds of resources that you know you've

(01:15:16):
provided by doing the research and the thinking become extremely
powerful tools to help parents and coaches for that matter, navigate.

Speaker 2 (01:15:24):
Mm hmm, Well that's very kind to here. That's good
to know. Yeah, I mean it, yeah, yeah, and you're
absolutely it does You're actually right there is that you know,
you mentioned the kind of the economic side and the
kind of social side that it probably that intensification of sports,
the talent development does seem to coincide with the increase

(01:15:45):
of athletes as being these you know, celebrities, you know,
the whole kind of a society says, look, this is
this is the best possible kind of life you could have,
Like if there's one where you know, everyone dreams of being,
you know, we all want to be, or so many
of our streams are being those professional athletes. And again
I wonder, you know, to sort of maybe understand that
that push for parents as well. It must you must

(01:16:07):
always think what you wouldn't want is just your your
child fool just short, right, that if only I kind
of pushed them a bit harder when they train a
little bit more, they would have made it, you know,
and that that maybe you know again that maybe unconsciously
is pushing back. But you know, I really have to
go all out because nothing worse would be worse than
just not making it. Me thinking off only you know,

(01:16:28):
if only we'd done the extra Sunday training, you would
have got the contract. And you know, you're.

Speaker 1 (01:16:34):
Tapping into my duel fears there now. So there's the
fear of the ruined childhood, and then there's the fear
of the child coming to you at age whatever, going
why didn't you push me harder?

Speaker 2 (01:16:45):
Well, that's it. Yeah, yeah, that's exactly in the way.

Speaker 1 (01:16:48):
You're down.

Speaker 2 (01:16:48):
If you're doing, you're down if you don't, right, I
guess you lose either way as a parent. But that
that I think, that's that that is I think genuine
and valid, you know, I think and I think for
parents of factor that in I think, Yeah, I suppose
what as you sort of I think nicely put up
the purpose of the paper whilst trying to do is
just highlight the various issues and kind of reasons that
push forward against and not to say that the right

(01:17:09):
decision here, but to kind of really highlight as much
as possible with the various factors that feed into kind
of parental decision making and that basic question of yeah,
what what do I how do I want to try
and develop my child in what ways? What do I
want their life to be like or go like? It's
not saying what the answer is, but trying to kind
of equipment with the kind of concepts and ideas and

(01:17:29):
you know, viewpoints to think through that as ethically as possible.

Speaker 1 (01:17:34):
Well, I really appreciate you joining me and spending time
talking to me at the paper, and I really, like
I said, it's been a really really useful resource for
me and help me with a lot of different things
I was thinking about. I can imagine actually that there's
quite a lot of organizations, you know, whether they're sort
of you know, sports club professional sports club governing bodies
who listen to the podcast and may want to reach

(01:17:56):
out to maybe you know, it's come and speak to
them about you know, your thinkings on your thinking on
these sorts of subjects. Is there a way best way
for people to get in touch?

Speaker 2 (01:18:06):
Yeah, well yeah, email address is always best. Yeah, if
you if you look at search Paddy McQueen, Swans University,
you'll you'll see my page and the email address. So yeah,
that obviously I would be delighted to ye speak and
get in touch with anyone. So if anyone is interested,
please to email me.

Speaker 1 (01:18:24):
Buddy, thank you very much for joining me a really
great conversation and yeah, I'm hoping I'm looking forward to
whatever you're working on next.

Speaker 2 (01:18:34):
That's a good question.

All Episodes

The dilemmas of talented children - a conversation with Paddy McQueen

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

24/7 News: The Latest

Dateline NBC

The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The dilemmas of talented children - a conversation with Paddy McQueen