Laddas ned direkt. Appealing to a wide audience, this ground-breaking handbook takes an in-depth look at soccer match analysis, highlighting the latest in match analysis research and the innovative technologies now being used by professional soccer clubs around the world. Bridging the gap between research, theory and practice, these methods can be used by coaches, sport scientists and fitness coaches to assess and improve: styles of play, technical ability and physical fitness objective performance feedback to players the development of specific training routines use of available notation software, video analysis and manual systems understanding of current academic research in soccer notational analysis.
This is the first book to focus exclusively on football, and is based on the authors' extensive experience in academic and professional match analysis. Passar bra ihop. Recensioner i media.
The significant effects in this analysis with the transformation applied were: simple effects, Type of start-up, Intention, Zc. Significant second-order effects, Type of start-up-Intention; Type of start-up-Zc. Finally, a third-order interaction Type of start-up-Zc-Match Status was significant. The main effects of the three significant simple factors were represented, with their values related to possession time Figure 1. In this way, possession time with respect to Type of start-up was obtained, and was slightly greater when the start is given in a set piece than in transition.
With respect to the Zc a greater possession of the ball was observed in the offensive zone. Regarding the factor Intention of the observed team, when it recovers the ball, it was observed that the greatest possession time was given in an intention to progress with the ball p: progress , and somewhat less when the intention was to preserve the ball k: keep. The combination of the three factors with the maximum time of possession would be: in offensive zone, starting from a set pieces and with the intention of progressing the ball.
The significant interactions of the model Type of start-up-Intention; Type of start-up-Zc were shown Figure 2. In the case of the Type of start-up-Intention interaction, it could be seen how, both in the plays that started at set pieces and in transition, the greatest possession time occurred when the team intended to keep the ball. In the Type of start-up-Zc interaction, a greater possession time was observed, both in the offensive zone, and the defensive zone, when the offensive phase was initiated by means of a transition.
A first prediction was formed by the Type of start-up-Intention factors. The values of the categories of the beginning of the sequence were presented in relation to team intention. In Table 4 it can be observed, how a greater possession of the ball will be produced when the play begins by means of a transition.
A second prediction configured by the factors Type of start-up-Zc , indicates that there will always be greater possession of the ball, both in the defensive and offensive zones, if initiated by means of a transition. For the prediction of three factors Type of start-up-Zc-Match Status the following situations were collected Table 5 :.
If the play is started at set pieces actions, there will be a longer possession time with a tied score, both in the defensive and offensive zones. In the case of a start with transition. There will be a longer possession time in the defensive zone with the score tied and in the offensive zone with the marker losing.
Table 6 shows the results obtained in the variance analysis, with the new adjustment. Table 6. ANOVA results with transformed dependent variable, for non-successful teams. The main effects were represented, of the two significant simple factors and their values related to the time of possession Figure 3.
- Pro Linux System Administration.
- Human Herpesviruses: Biology, Therapy, and Immunoprophylaxis!
- The Media of Diaspora.
In this way, it was observed that the greatest possession time with respect to the Intention factor occurs when there was an intention to keep the ball k: keep , and much less when the intention was to progress p: progress. In the factor score Match Status , the greatest possession time was given when the team was losing, while the shortest possession time was given when the team was winning.
The combination of the two factors indicate that the maximum possession time is achieved, based on an intention to keep the ball, when the team is losing. Figure 4 shows the significant interactions of the model, according to the type of start-up.
In the case of the Type of start-up-Intention interaction, it could be observed that, in both types of starts of the play, the longest possession time occurred when the intention was to keep the ball. Figure 4. In the Type of start-up-Zc interaction, the longest possession time was given in the case of starting with a set piece in the defensive zone.
In the case of start with transition, possession time was the same in both zones. In the Type of start-up-Match Status interaction, it was observed how the greatest possession time occurred when the team started the play on set pieces and was losing. The shortest time of possession occurred, both in the start of set actions and transition, with the score in favor.
- Plane Algebraic Curves?
- The Arabs and Islam in Late Antiqiuity: A Critique of Approaches to Arabic Sources.
- Performance analysis in soccer: a Cartesian coordinates based approach using RoboCup data.
- Browse more videos.
With the score drawing there were hardly any differences in possession time regardless of the form of start of the play. If we analyze the Intention-Match Status interaction, we can observe how two intersections occurred Figure 5. The draw marker interacted with the winning and losing markers. This is because possession time with a draw score was much greater when the intention was to keep the ball, whereas when the intention was to progress it decreased considerably. With the score losing, the longest possession time occurred with the intention of keeping the ball with a descent when the intention was to progress.
Table 7 shows the results corresponding to the significant interactions with the Type of start-up. We can observe how a longer possession time will be produced when the play is initiated by means of a transition, whether it is intended to keep or progress. We can also observe how, in the defensive zone, greater possession will occur if it is started by means of a set pieces and, in the offensive zone, if it is initiated by means of a transition.
Finally, A greater possession time with the score winning will occur when the play is initiated by means of a transition. Both with the score losing and drawing, there will be a longer possession time when set pieces actions start. In Table 8 , we present the significant predictions based on Match status. If we analyze the predictions based on team intention and partial result we can see how, with the score drawing, there will be a longer possession time if you try to keep the ball and, with the result of losing, there will be a greater possession if you try to progress.
For the prediction of three factors Type of start-up-ZC and Match Status , the following situations may be possible Table 9 :. In the defensive zone will be greater possession when the score is drawing, whether the play is initiated by means of a transition or set pieces. There will be greater possession of the ball in offensive zone when the set piece starts with the score losing, and, if it starts with a transition, with the score winning.
Ball possession has been identified as a differentiating performance indicator between successful and unsuccessful teams Grant et al. This work was proposed with the intention of discriminating possession time qualitative and quantitatively in successful and unsuccessful teams from a mixed methods perspective, to try to identify an effective ball possession model.
The results have allowed us to identify significant differences between ball possession models of both groups of teams. Specifically, based on the results of the simple effects, we have detected that in successful teams possession time is influenced by, the form of start of the offensive phase, the intention of the team once possession is recovered and possession zone. Successful teams are characterized by having longer possessions in the offensive zone when they start at set pieces actions and with the intention of progressing. On the other hand, in unsuccessful teams possession time of the offensive phase is influenced by team intention, once the possession of the ball has been recovered, and by the match status.
In the latter case, our results corroborate those obtained in previous studies Sasaki et al. These teams will have longer possessions when they are losing, results in line with some previous works Sasaki et al. Of these results, perhaps the most significant is to indicate how the partial result, in successful teams, does not influence possession time.
Indicating, in this case, that these teams do not vary their game model based on match status, while unsuccessful ones do, coinciding with the results of Bloomfield et al. These data differ from some of the previously mentioned works since, their results show the same pattern of ball possession, for both groups of teams, depending on the evolution of the match status.
This circumstance may indicate an evolution of the game of successful teams toward more stable possession models, and less influenced by the evolution of the match status. If we analyze the results obtained when studying the interaction of the different variables selected with possession time, we can observe how in the second order interactions there are also significant differences between both groups of teams.
While successful teams are characterized by having longer possessions in the offensive zone, when they start possession through a transition, unsuccessful teams have longer possessions in the defensive zone, initiating the attack through set pieces ball actions and, above all, when they are losing. We cannot compare these results with previous works, since we have not found any study that performs a multivariate analysis with the indicators selected here.
Some previous works Casal et al.
This can be explained because successful teams are supposed to have a higher technical-tactical level, and are able to overcome the greater defensive pressure and accumulation of players near the opposing goal and, on the contrary, unsuccessful teams will only be able of maintaining possession in those areas of lower defensive pressure that, in general, are close to your goal.
Finally, observing the data obtained in third-order interactions, which will allow us to make predictions about how possession time of the team will be, according to the relationships between the selected variables. In this case, we can check how the main differences between both teams occur in the following cases:. Successful teams will always have greater possession time, both in defensive and offensive zone in the event that the play is initiated by means of a transition. These data are in line with what was previously stated when finding that successful teams have longer possession times than unsuccessful ones, indicating that higher-level teams try to control the game, and take the initiative, through ball possession, helped by the high individual performances of their players.
In the case of unsuccessful teams, if the offensive phase starts on set pieces actions, the greatest possession will occur in the defensive zone and, if the play is initiated by means of a transition, in the offensive zone. On the contrary, if they start the offensive phase after a recovery of the ball, it may be easier for them to progress to more advanced zones, due to the defensive disorganization of the opposing team, since this is in an open disposition, with greater inter and intra-line space. If we take into account the type of start-up and the match status, successful teams will produce their greatest possession with a score draw and starting the play by means of a set pieces ball action.
This data shows, once again, the control of the game performed by higher level teams, maintaining possession of the ball.co.organiccrap.com/164306.php
Notational Analysis of Sport: Systems for Better Coaching and Performance in - Google книги
In the case of unsuccessful teams, if they are winning, they will have greater possession initiating the play through a transition. As we discussed earlier, in this circumstance of the game, the opposing team will perform a defensive pressure, because of their need to score as much, and the lower level of unsuccessful teams will not allow them to maintain possession for a long time unless they initiate the attack through a dynamic transition, without leaving time for the rival team to organize defensively.
If they find themselves losing or drawing, the possession will be longer if the play starts at set pieces actions.
In this case, the rival team does not have the need to press defensively, which will facilitate the team possession. If we consider the type of start-up, the match status and field zone. In this case, we see how successful teams will always have longer possessions initiating the offensive plays by means of a transition and this possession will be more extensive in the defensive zone if they are drawing and in the offensive zone if they are winning. In the first case, it can be considered a normal behavior, since not having the need to score so much, can give up on counterattacks and its main objective can be focused on keeping the ball, as a defensive method.
The second behavior is somewhat contradictory, since, if they are winning, it is normal for the opposing team to perform defensive pressure and this pressure will be greater near their goal, so maintaining possession in this zone will be more difficult that to do it near the own goal, where the pressure of the adversary team is smaller.
Handbook Of Soccer Match Analysis: A Systematic Approach To Improving Performance
On the other hand, unsuccessful teams, in the case of being drawing, will always have more extensive possessions in the defensive zone, regardless of the type of start of the play. In addition, in spite of being able to have the will to progress toward the rival goal, it lacks the technical-tactical mechanisms necessary for it, hence that it passes great moments of the game in the initial gestation phase of the offensive game.
Adversary teams, in this situation, do not have the need to quickly recover the possession of the ball, and may allow it to be in the power of the opposing team, but away from their own goal. For these teams possessions will be of greater duration in the offensive zone, losing, and initiating the play by means of a set pieces action and winning, by means of a transition. The second situation has already been explained previously, in this case the defensive pressure of the rival team will only allow to have the ball a minimum of time in control, until they are able to make a counterattack.
Based on the results obtained, we can prove how our hypothesis regarding possession analysis from the mixed methods perspective was confirmed, which would allow us to differentiate the possessions of successful and unsuccessful teams and describe a more effective possession style. This knowledge will allow the elaboration of intervention strategies to optimize team possession. However, the results of this work cannot be generalized to all matches and competitions, because only national teams have been analyzed and in a specific competition.
The system can't perform the operation now. Try again later. Citations per year. Duplicate citations. The following articles are merged in Scholar. Their combined citations are counted only for the first article. Merged citations. This "Cited by" count includes citations to the following articles in Scholar. Add co-authors Co-authors. Upload PDF. Follow this author. New articles by this author. New citations to this author.