La International Federation of Padel (FIP) has just announced the establishment of a Mandatory license for professional coaches, an initiative that, while it seems well-intentioned, raises many questions. Is it really necessary to structure to this extent a profession that, until now, has developed organically, often according to the performances of the players and the relationships they build with their coaches?

Necessary supervision or excessive constraint?

The launch of this license by the FIP raises a fundamental question: was it really necessary to formalize the profession of professional coach with such a measure? Certainly, the objective of professionalizing and standardizing standards seems laudable, but this implies a interference potential of the FIP in an area which, until now, was more about merit, recognition of players and results on the field.

Now a question arises: is it essential to be a former professional player to become a recognized coach? While personal experience at the highest level is often an asset, it in no way guarantees teaching skills or the ability to support players in the long term. Conversely, many coaches who have never played at the highest level have proven their value through tangible results. This license Does it risk marginalizing these atypical but talented profiles?

FIP taking over coaching?

With this new regulation, another fear arises: the total dependence of coaches on the FIP. Will this license be mandatory to follow its players during competitions? FIP Tour or circuit Premier Padel ? In other words, could the FIP decide who is "fit" or not to exercise this profession, according to its own criteria? If this is the case, this would amount to entrusting a single entity with the power to judge who can or cannot accompany the players, which could lead to abuses.

The coaching profession would thus become dependent on the approval of the FIP. Does this not risk creating a form of institutional dependency, where coaches should meet standards imposed by the federation, to the detriment of a freer and more diversified approach to the profession?

Premature development?

Padel is still booming, especially through circuits like the FIP Tour et Premier Padel, who are seeking to establish themselves and gain visibility. Would it not be more judicious to let this sport structure itself naturally before implementing such measures? A certain freedom of action could allow padel players to find their balance and promote innovation in supporting players.

Finally, this license could pose a harmonization problem. Many countries, such as the France, already have specific training courses for padel coaches. Will this new license be integrated into existing systems, or will it be added to them, creating a new layer of bureaucracy and possible redundancies ?

A false good idea?

While the idea of ​​professionalizing coaching seems relevant in theory, it raises doubts about its practical implementation. Isn't the best selection of coaches done naturally, through results and the relationships they establish with their players? At this level of competition, it is often the results which speak for themselves, rather than a certification imposed by a federation.

Ultimately, this license raises more questions than it answers. While it may offer positive prospects for the development of coaching, one cannot help but wonder about the need for such a measure in a sport that is still seeking its full maturity.

Is this a step forward for padel, or a way for the FIP to take tighter control over its players? Only time will tell.

Franck Binisti

Franck Binisti discovered padel at the Club des Pyramides in 2009 in the Paris region. Since then, padel has been part of his life. You often see him touring France to cover major French padel events.

On the same subject

Tags