Man-to-man or zone defense? Measuring team dispersion behaviors in small-sided soccer games

• Autorzy: Frias T. , Duarte R.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

In the last years, sports scientists have increasingly considered teams to be complex, dynamical systems and have started to capture their team dynamics based on tracked positional data. However, few studies have focused on the influence of specific performance constraints such as the defense playing method in the team dispersion behaviors. The aim of this exploratory study was to analyze the influence of changing the defense playing method from zone defense to man-to-man defense, in the team dispersion behaviors during small-sided soccer games. We analyzed two small-sided games played by two teams of 6 players (5 outfield players plus a goalkeeper). In the first experimental condition both teams used zone defense, and in the second condition they changed to man-to-man defense. Team dispersion behaviors were captured by four compound variables found in literature – surface area, stretch index, length per with ratio (lpwratio) and teams’ centers distance. Results suggested that the defensive playing method influences team dispersion behaviors. Compared to man-to-man defense, using zone defense teams showed low values of surface area (326 ± 139 m² vs. 360 ± 172 m2 for Team 1 and 195 ± 111 m2 vs. 265 ± 133 m2 for Team 2) and length per with ratio (0.70 ± 0.20 vs. 0.80 ± 0.42 for Team 1 and 0.47 ± 0.21 vs. 0.58 ± 0.24 for Team 2). Contrariwise, zone defense implied high values of distance between the geometrical centers (8.6 ± 2.3 m vs. 5.4 ± 1.6 m), when compared to man-to-man defense, respectively. Stretch index values were not similar for the two teams as Team 1 showed high values for zone defense (15.7 ± 2.8 m vs. 15.2 ± 3.0 m), and Team 2 showed low values for zone defense (10.9 ± 2.8 m vs. 11.6 ± 2.6 m). These findings, although at an exploratory level, suggest that teams adopting zone defense tend to be more compacted, especially in the wide direction of the field. Moreover, zone defense also implied a more structured spatial behavior with teams enlarging the distance between each other.

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Trends in Sport Sciences
• Rocznik: 2014
• Tom: 21
• Numer: 3
• Opis fizyczny: p.135-144,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Frias T.

• Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Lisbon, Portugal

autor

Duarte R.

• Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Lisbon, Portugal

Bibliografia

• 1. Davids K, Araujo D, Shuttleworth R. Applications of dynamical systems theory to football. In: Reilly T, Cabri J, Araujo D, eds., Science and Football V, 537-550. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis, 2005.
• 2. Duarte R, Araujo D, Gazimba V, Fernandes O, Folgado H, Marmeleira J, Davids K. The ecological dynamics of 1v1 sub-phases in association football. The Open Sports Sciences Journal, 2010; 3, 16-18.
• 3. McGarry T, Anderson D, Wallace S, Hughes M, Franks I. Sport competition as a dynamical self-organizing system. Journal of Sports Sciences, 2002; 15, 171-181.
• 4. McGarry T. Applied and theoretical perspectives of performance analysis in sport: Scientific issues and challenges. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 2009; 9, 128-140.
• 5. Passos P, Araujo D, Davids K, Gouveia L, Serpa S, Milho J, et al. Interpersonal pattern dynamics and adaptive behavior in multiagent neurobiological systems: Conceptual model and data. Journal of Motor Behavior, 2009; 41(5), 445-459.
• 6. Araujo D, Davids K, Hristovski R. The ecological dynamics of decision making in sport. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 2006; 7, 653-676.
• 7. Duarte R, Araujo D, Fernandes O, Fonseca C, Correia V, Gazimba V, et al. Capturing complex human behaviors in representative sports contexts with a single camera. Medicina (Kaunas), 2010; 46(6), 408-414.
• 8. Travassos B, Araujo D, Correia V, Esteves P. Eco- Dynamics Approach to the study of Team Sports Performance. The Open Sports Sciences Journal, 2010; 3, 56-57.
• 9. McGarry T, Khan MA, Franks IM. On the presence and absence of behavioural traits in sport: an example from championship squash match-play. Journal of Sports Sciences, 1999; 17, 297-311.
• 10. McGarry T. Identifying patterns in squash contests using dynamical analysis and human perception. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 2006; 6, 134-147.
• 11. McGarry T, Walter F. On the detection of space¬time patterns in squash using dynamical analysis. International Journal of Computer Science in Sport, 2007; 6, 42-49.
• 12. Palut Y, Zanone P-G. A dynamical analysis of tennis: Concepts and data. Journal of Sports Sciences, 2005; 23, 1021-1032.
• 13. Lames M. Modeling the interaction in game sports - relative phase and moving correlations. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine, 2006; 5, 556-560.
• 14. Hristovski R, Davids K, Araujo D. Affordance- controlled bifurcations of action patterns in martial arts. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology and Life Sciences, 2006; 10, 409-449.
• 15. Bourbousson J, Sève C, McGarry T. Space-time coordination dynamics in basketball: Part 1. Intra- and inter-couplings among player dyads. Journal of Sports Sciences, 2010a; 28, 339-347.
• 16. Passos P, Araujo D, Davids K, Gouveia L, Milho J, Serpa S. Information governing dynamics of attacker- defender interactions in youth rugby union. Journal of Sports Sciences, 2008; 26(13), 1421-1429.
• 17. Bourbousson J, Sève C, McGarry T. Space-time coordination dynamics in basketball: Part 2. The interaction between the two teams. Journal of Sports Sciences, 2010b; 28, 349-358.
• 18. Sumpter DJ. The principles of collective animal behaviour. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London: Series B, 2006; 361, 5-22.
• 19. Schollhorn W. Coordination dynamics and its consequences on sports. International Journal of Computer Science in Sport, 2003; 2(2), 40-46.
• 20. Frencken W, Lemmink K. Team kinematics of small- sided soccer games: a systematic approach. In: Reilly T, Korkusuz F, eds. Science and Soccer VI, 161-166. London: Routledge, 2008.
• 21. Frencken W, Lemmink K, Delleman N, Visscher C. Oscillations of centroid position and surface area of soccer teams in small-sided games. European Journal of Sport Science, 2011; 11(4), 215-223.
• 22. Folgado H, Lemmin K, Frencken W, Sampaio J. Length, width and centroid distance as measures of teams tactical performance in youth football. European Journal of Sport Science, 2014; 14 (Suppl. 1), S487-492.
• 23. Kim S. Voronoi analysis of a soccer game. Nonlinear Analysis: Modelling and Control, 2004; 9, 233-240.
• 24. Barbero-Âlvarez JC, Coutts A, Granda J, Barbero- Âlvarez V, Castagna C. The validity and reliability of a Global Positioning Satellite system device to assess speed and repeated sprint ability (RSA) in athletes. J Sci Med Sport, 2010; 13, 232-235.
• 25. Gray AJ, Jenkins D, Andrews MH, Taagge DR, Glover ML. Validity and reliability of GPS for measuring distance travelled in field-based team sports. Journal of Sports Sciences, 2010; 28(12), 1319-1325.
• 26. Yue Z, Broich H, Seifriz F, Mester J. Mathematical analysis of a soccer game, Part I, Studies in applied mathematics, 2008; 121, 159-179.
• 27. Fradua L, Zubillaga A, Caro O, Fernandéz-Garcia AI, Ruiz-Ruiz C, Tenga A. Designing small-sided games for training tactical aspects in soccer: Extrapolating pitch sizes from full-size professional matches. Journal of Sports Sciences, 2013; 31(6), 573-581.
• 28. Marsh KL, Richardson MJ, Baron RM, Schmidt RC. Contrasting approaches to perceiving and acting with others. Ecological Psychology, 2006; 18, 1-37.
• 29. Duarte R, Frias T. Collective intelligence: An incursion into the tactical performance of football teams. In: Jemni M, Bianco A, Palma A, eds. Proceedings of the First International Conference in Science and Football (pp. 23-28); Palermo, 2011.