But, without a doubt, my favourite thing? It's sitting in a change room like this after a match. There's no time frame on how long you'll sit there. There's no formality. You're just enjoying each other's company, thinking about cricket.
I would play games long enough to discover what games were doing and how they were doing it. And then I'd spend the rest of my time building.
When I work a game as an analyst, all I do is look at the game like a coach.
This game is obviously about failure. You're going to fail most of the time. It's how you handle it.
Defensively, from a team standpoint, I didn't feel I played very well. Very rarely was I satisfied with how I played.
I think, generally speaking as a player, when I hear the word 'scout,' it's usually, 'The Seattle Storm are playing the L.A. Sparks tomorrow; the assistant coaches are scouting the L.A. Sparks.' And then they come to us and give a scouting report on the players and the team.
When you call a game, it's almost like you're doing a three-hour movie and the production of it all, living in the moment in real time, the replays, all the intricacies that go into putting a game in a broadcast. It's not just 100 percent football.
You just constantly are evaluating and learning and drawing players and coverages and talking through it. It's part of making you the player, how you want to approach the game.
I watch a lot of games and analyze a lot.
Whenever I have played a game of cricket, whether it is under-16, under-19, or State level, my approach has been the same.
You always try to take the positives and negatives out of the game.
I break down the tape like I'm a quality-control coach, just like I was with the Packers in 1992. I break it down by hand, every play.
If you have a game where you're under pressure, obviously there are going to be a lot of shots on target, and you're going to make saves, but you can't say you played well in a game where you concede five goals. It's ridiculous.
When we are in possession, tactically, he is the best coach in the world for me. He works hard, watches a lot of games, and prepares us really well. Guardiola has the feeling for gaping spaces, and he already had that as a player.
I'll look at stats after a game to see the work I've done in different areas.
As a quarterback, when you do have a three-and-out or things do not go right, you are the first one to know. You know more than anyone out there what went wrong and what needs to be corrected and don't necessarily always need to hear it when you come off to the sideline.
Analytics only goes so far. Basketball, more than baseball, for example, is really a team sport.
I've got a PowerPoint deck that I use for internal presentations, and there's a slide on it that asks, 'What percentage of your game is combat versus exploration versus puzzle solving versus platforming,' and I refuse to answer that question.
After games, you think about the play you missed.
The most important thing for a forward is speed of thought. Top players read the game.
In England and Germany, perhaps, there is more of a focus on the physical side of the game, in breaking down the opposition's play, especially against the lower placed sides.
There's never a lot of Brazillian football played in these games.
I'm going to make mistakes, I just have to be able to learn from them as quickly as possible. To learn faster, I watch film of myself and other good point guards, and then breaking down my mistakes and really analyzing them and seeing where I could have made better decisions.
You're frustrated when things aren't going right. When you're out there, you have your piece of it, your view. It isn't until usually the next day when you're watching the film that you get to put all the pieces together: 'Oh, this is what happened on that play'; 'This is why I did that.' You don't totally know that game day.
That's how I judge a quarterback: Either you make plays or you don't. I don't even want to talk about mechanics.
