The coach is modern and does not want to enforce discipline nor limitations. 

He remembers the authoritarian coach from his youth, despises such attitude towards players and wants to be their friend. Sometimes, the reason behind such leadership is lack of interest, meaning the attitude; it is not that important. 

He avoids conflicts with kids and when it comes to it, he distracts kids from a problem:

A good atmosphere is the most important element for the team. 

Out of fear of being authoritarian, he excludes his own authority from relationship with kids, but he expects kids to return ”His goodness by their goodness”. 

Such coaches are described as “democratic leaders” but it is deception:

Such coach is not a leader at all. 

Soon, he becomes just another member of the team who behaves in accordance to the wishes of the real leader. 

His positive influence on the development of kids and on the group dynamic is minimal. 

Observing superficially, he is releasing himself from the responsibility for (un)success of those processes and their consequences. 

However, the truth is different:

He is the one responsible. 

This is his job, which is why he is called a coach. It is not fair to transfer his responsibility on kids and look for excuses in them. 

It is mostly not clear how good the handball knowledge of such coaches is (they could be real experts), because it is difficult for them to create situations where they could transfer their knowledge to players. 

In relationship without leadership nobody knows:

Who takes decisions and who is responsible. 

A democratic coach has no or bad influence on the internal leadership of kids. 

With his behaviour he shows he is not capable or has no interest in leading the group – a model child should imitate is: inability or lack of interest.