This study re-examines the issue of “excessive coaching” in extracurricular sports activities and clarifies the causes of short of “coaching circuit,” raised by Kubo, by focusing on the coach’s desire. First, I demonstrate the significance of this concept as both recognizing the coaching process as a circuit and introducing the “philosophy” step within the circuit. Although the short of circuit implies “excessive coaching,” Kubo’s discussion simply remains a suggestion of the cause of “excessive coaching,” which would be a limitation of his theory.
In the sport philosophical literature, most researchers discussing the background of “excessive coaching” have analyzed the cause for the relationship between coach and students. Phenomenologically, however, the relationship is the inner structure of a team, and there is scope for further investigation into the external structure. This external structure of a team would indicate the other teams or coaches as competitors for the coach, because competitive sports, with competition as their essence, are played as extracurricular activities. This understanding suggests the new viewpoint of “plurality” of coaches, according to which, a coach unconsciously exaggerates her/his desire for winning for herself/himself while facing competitions with other innumerable coaches. Here, the crucial problem is that this coach’s desire for herself/himself obscures another desire, namely, letting students win a game for their human development, which is supposed to be upheld by the coach. Thus, the short of “coaching circuit” refers to the phenomenon of losing the basic and essential goal of coaching, guided by the result of a triangular desire’s boost. In this situation, the coach would regard the students either as a machine for achieving her/his desires or an obstacle in the path of realizing it, resulting in “excessive coaching,” including abusive or violent behavior.