Regulating psychological support: how much progress is football making?
Regulating psychological support: how much progress is football making?
Rhetoric still trumps regulation when it comes to mental health and performance
Regulating psychological support: how much progress is football making?
Nine months ago, I wrote an article about the regulation of psychological support offered to professional footballers playing in England. The premise was simple: despite the ever-increasing volume of press releases and social media campaigns devoted to mental health and performance, there was a paucity of regulation covering these much-trumpeted areas of the game.
In the eyes of some observers, the system was failing to protect the very people it should be safeguarding; namely, the players. Almost a year on, what’s changed? Has English professional football got to grips with an issue of real importance?
Subscribe to The Mind Room for free & receive articles like this in your inbox every week
On the face of it, the facts seem fairly damning. There remains only one existing psychology-focused regulation applicable to England’s leading clubs. Rule 111 of the Elite Player Performance Plan states that top ‘Category One’ academies must employ a psychologist formally recognised by the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) or on a ‘pathway’ towards being listed on the HCPC register. There is still no equivalent stipulation related to mental health or psychological support received by first-team players such as Marcus Rashford, though. The Premier League, contacted in the course of writing this article, is currently unable to comment publicly on the matter.
Looking beyond the confines of the biggest 20 clubs in the English game, a mixed picture presents itself. According to the British Association of Sport and Exercise Sciences (BASES), discussions about accreditation and professional standards, which - nine months ago - were ongoing with the Football Association, the Scottish Football Association, and the Football Association of Wales, "have not progressed beyond initial contact". Meanwhile, in response to a request for comment, The British Psychological Society (BPS) said that its Division of Sport and Exercise Psychology (DSEP) “has been very concerned about the use of unregistered psychology practitioners in sport for some time.”
This isn’t to say that progress has completely stalled. BASES is working with a number of football clubs to support enrollment in an accreditation partnership scheme, whilst DSEP said that it is “working closely with the HCPC to raise awareness of this issue in football clubs…providing the HCPC with a list of football clubs/employers and anticipating that the regulator will engage with them to highlight the importance of employing regulated professionals.”
But, as it stands, English football is still some way from embracing blanket regulation of psychologists in the way, say, the work of physiotherapists is overseen. As DSEP points out, “no leading club uses an unqualified medic or physiotherapist…this change in the employment of qualified physios was partly driven by insurers indicating that player insurance would be invalid if unqualified practitioners were used…we will keep pushing to achieve a similar position for psychologists.”
Regulation, of course, is far from the only issue affecting the provision of psychological support within football. Pay, help for non-playing staff and coach training programmes - which some observers still say prioritise tactical and technical education over psychology - are all well-known challenges that this newsletter has previously covered in-depth.
Calls for regulatory reform also need to recognise the nuances of the topic. 'Unaccredited' practitioners (i.e. professionals not listed on the HCPC register) shouldn't be bracketed as one nebulous body and unfairly stigmatised.
Whilst there are accounts of unregulated psychologists putting off players from accessing support, it's equally true that specialists without accreditation are receiving glowing client testimonials. I've spoken to a number of people in the latter group, with seemingly strong track records (acknowledging the difficulty in measuring success in this field) and the overriding impression is of a struggling system. If clubs aren't stressing the need for accreditation when recruiting, for example, where is the incentive for established professionals to embark on an approved training route?
The onus is on all of the stakeholders involved - from leagues and clubs to trade bodies and the profession itself - to try and correct the failings. A system that allows regulatory investigation of complaints and, in the words of DSEP, “gives added protection to both players and clubs against breaches of standards”, is surely in everyone’s interests. Without this, the game risks finding itself in the same position in nine months’ time.
Subscribe to The Mind Room for free & receive articles like this in your inbox every week
Previous articles
New subscriber or looking for access to the back catalogue of Mind Room articles? You can access all of the stories, covering everything from AC Milan’s neuroscience lab to Wycombe’s ground-breaking academy psychology programme, here.
Podcast
You can listen to all episodes of The Football Psychology Show, sister podcast of The Mind Room, here.
Questions?
Get in touch by sending me a Twitter or LinkedIn DM.
Thanks again for reading The Mind Room!