Differences between Elite and Semi-Elite Australian Football Conceptualised through the Lens of Ecological Dynamics
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methods
2.1. Procedures
2.2. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
6. Practical Implications
- Disposals performed within the AFL are shaped by more pronounced temporal and spatial constraints relative to those within semi-elite competitions.
- Coaches at both AFL and semi-elite levels could use the data presented here to design training activities that afford representative constraint characteristics specific to elite and semi-elite levels.
- Sports performance analysts should align practices with theories common to skill acquisition, affording them with data of use for representative learning design.
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Davids, K.; Araujo, D.; Vilar, L.; Renshaw, I.; Pinder, R. An Ecological Dynamics Approach to Skill Acquisition: Implications for Development of Talent in Sport. Talent Dev. Excell. 2013, 5, 21–34. [Google Scholar]
- Kugler, P.N. A Morphological Perspective on the Origin and Evolution of Movement Patterns. In Motor Development in Children: Aspects of Coordination and Control; Springer Science and Business Media LLC: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1986; pp. 459–525. [Google Scholar]
- Newell, K.M. Constraints on the Development of Coordination. In Motor Development in Children: Aspects of Coordination and Control; Springer Science and Business Media LLC: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1986; pp. 341–360. [Google Scholar]
- McGinnis, P.; Newell, K. Topological dynamics: A framework for describing movement and its constraints. Hum. Mov. Sci. 1982, 1, 289–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Renshaw, I.; Chow, J.Y.; Davids, K.; Hammond, J. A constraints-led perspective to understanding skill acquisition and game play: A basis for integration of motor learning theory and physical education praxis? Phys. Educ. Sport Pedagogy 2010, 15, 117–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davids, K. The constraints-based approach to motor learning: Implications for a non-linear pedagogy in sport and physical education. In Motor Learning in Practice: A Constraints-Led Approach; Renshaw, I., Davids, K.W., Savelsbergh, G.J.P., Eds.; Routledge (Taylor & Francis Group): London, UK, 2010; pp. 3–16. [Google Scholar]
- Robertson, S.; Back, N.; Bartlett, J. Explaining match outcome in elite Australian Rules football using team performance indicators. J. Sport Sci. 2016, 34, 637–644. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Araujo, D.; Davids, K.; Chow, J.Y.; Passos, P.; Raab, M. The development of decision making skill in sport: An ecological dynamics perspective. In Perspectives on Cognition and Action in Sport; Araujo, D., Ripoll, H., Eds.; Nova Science Publishers, Inc.: Suffolk, NY, USA, 2009; pp. 157–169. [Google Scholar]
- Glazier, P.; Robins, M. Self-organisation and constraints in sports performance. In Routledge Handbook of Sports Performance Analysis; McGarry, T., O’Donoghue, P., Sampaio, J., Eds.; Routledge (Taylor & Francis Group): London, UK, 2013; pp. 42–52. [Google Scholar]
- Pinder, R.; Davids, K.; Renshaw, I.; Araujo, D. Representative learning design and functionality of research and practice in sport. J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 2013, 33, 146–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Corbett, D.M.; Bartlett, J.D.; O’Connor, F.; Back, N.; Torres-Ronda, L.; Robertson, S.; Robertson, S. Development of physical and skill training drill prescription systems for elite Australian Rules football. Sci. Med. Footb. 2017, 2, 51–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Landis, J.R.; Koch, G.G. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977, 33, 159–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2017; Available online: https://www.r-project.org/ (accessed on 14 February 2019).
- Kelly, K. The MBESS R Package. 2016. Available online: https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/MBESS/MBESS.pdf. (accessed on 14 February 2019).
- Hopkins, W.G. A New View of Statistics. Sportscience. 2010. Available online: http://www.sportsci.org/resource/stats (accessed on 14 February 2019).
- Roberton, S.; Spencer, B.; Back, N.; Farrow, D. A rule induction framework for the determination of representative learning design in skilled performance. J. Sport Sci. 2019, 37, 1280–1285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Woods, C.T.; Robertson, S.; Collier, N. Evolution of game-play in the Australian football league from 2001 to 2015. J. Sport Sci. 2017, 35, 1879–1887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Woods, C.T.; McKeown, I.; Shuttleworth, R.; Davids, K.; Robertson, S. Training programme designs in professional team sport: An ecological dynamics exemplar. Hum. Mov. Sci. 2019, 66, 318–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Brewer, C.; Dawson, B.; Heasman, J.; Stewart, G.; Cormack, S. Movement pattern comparisons in elite (AFL) and sub-elite (WAFL) Australian football games using GPS. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2010, 13, 618–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Constraint Class | Constraint | Description | Sub-Category Label |
---|---|---|---|
Task | Possession time in general play | Time between a player obtaining and then disposing of the ball while in general play (i.e., not from a mark or free kick) | 0–1 s 1–2 s 2–3 s >3 s |
Possession time from a stoppage in play (i.e., a “mark”) | Time between a player obtaining the ball from a stoppage in play (mark or free kick) and then disposing of it | 0–1 s 1–2 s 2–3 s >3 s | |
Disposal location | Location of each ball disposal (kick or handball) partitioned into four field locations | Defensive 50 Defensive Midfield Attacking Midfield Forward 50 | |
Environmental | Target density | Number of opposition players within a 3 m radius of the intended disposal target | Uncontested (e.g., 1 vs. 0) Even (e.g., 1 vs. 1) Superior (e.g., 2 vs. 1) Inferior (e.g., 1 vs. 2) |
Ball carrier density | Number of opposition players within a 3 m radius of the ball carrier at ball disposal | <1 Opposition Player 1 Opposition Player 2 Opposition Players 3 Opposition Players >3 Opposition Players | |
Individual | Disposal movement | Locomotive state at point of ball disposal | Stationary (e.g., walking) Dynamic (e.g., running) |
Notation | Sub-Category Label | Elite | Semi-Elite | d (90% CI) |
---|---|---|---|---|
General play TIP | 0–1 s | 36.57 ± 4.85 | 31.21 ± 3.99 | 1.24 (0.64–1.80) |
1–2 s | 25.52 ± 2.41 | 24.64 ± 2.27 | 0.42 (−0.11 to 0.95) | |
2–3 s | 6.83 ± 1.29 | 8.77 ± 2.09 | 1.01 (0.52–1.66) | |
>3 s | 4.32 ± 1.37 | 6.32 ± 2.14 | 1.10 (0.52–1.67) | |
Stoppage TIP | 0–1 s | 0.85 ± 0.46 | 1.13 ± 0.61 | 0.50 (−0.03–1.04) |
1–2 s | 3.27 ± 1.16 | 3.07 ± 1.21 | 0.16 (−0.36–0.69) | |
2–3 s | 3.35 ± 1.04 | 3.61 ± 1.31 | 0.21 (−0.31–0.74) | |
>3 s | 19.15 ± 2.75 | 21.21 ± 3.21 | 0.69 (0.14–1.23) | |
Disposal location | Defensive 50 | 23.20 ± 4.47 | 25.48 ± 7.34 | 0.37 (−0.16–0.90) |
Defensive Mid | 34.39 ± 3.75 | 35.53 ± 6.66 | 0.20 (−0.32–0.73) | |
Attack Mid | 29.15 ± 4.43 | 27.38 ± 5.91 | 0.33 (−0.19–0.87) | |
Forward 50 | 13.23 ± 3.00 | 11.60 ± 3.94 | 0.46 (−0.07–1.00) | |
Target density | Uncontested | 23.2 ± 7.53 | 23.6 ± 7.12 | 0.05 (−0.47–0.58) |
Even | 47.07 ± 5.50 | 47.35 ± 6.40 | 0.04 (0.48–0.57) | |
Inferior | 23.73 ± 6.46 | 21.42 ± 4.89 | 0.41 (−0.12–0.94) | |
Superior | 5.95 ± 2.12 | 7.57 ± 3.28 | 0.58 (0.03 – 1.12) | |
Carrier density | <1 Opposition | 35.58 ± 4.67 | 39.21 ± 4.47 | 0.80 (0.24–1.35) |
1 Opposition | 29.03 ± 2.78 | 28.49 ± 2.91 | 0.19 (−0.34–0.72) | |
2 Opposition | 18.06 ± 2.11 | 18.13 ± 3.67 | 0.02 (−0.51–0.55) | |
3 Opposition | 9.61 ± 2.08 | 7.85 ± 2.21 | 0.82 (0.26–1.37) | |
>3 Opposition | 7.71 ± 3.09 | 6.30 ± 2.16 | 0.54 (0.01–1.08) | |
Disposal movement | Dynamic | 89.39 ± 3.24 | 86.59 ± 3.24 | 0.89 (0.33–1.45) |
Stationary | 10.60 ± 3.09 | 13.40 ± 3.09 | 0.89 (0.33–1.45) |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Woods, C.T.; Jarvis, J.; McKeown, I. Differences between Elite and Semi-Elite Australian Football Conceptualised through the Lens of Ecological Dynamics. Sports 2019, 7, 159. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports7070159
Woods CT, Jarvis J, McKeown I. Differences between Elite and Semi-Elite Australian Football Conceptualised through the Lens of Ecological Dynamics. Sports. 2019; 7(7):159. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports7070159
Chicago/Turabian StyleWoods, Carl T., James Jarvis, and Ian McKeown. 2019. "Differences between Elite and Semi-Elite Australian Football Conceptualised through the Lens of Ecological Dynamics" Sports 7, no. 7: 159. https://doi.org/10.3390/sports7070159