Perceived distributed effort in team ball sports.
J Sports Sci. 2014 Jan 10.
Beniscelli V, Tenenbaum G, Schinke RJ, Torregrosa M.
In this study, we explored the multifaceted concept of perceived mental and physical effort in team sport contexts where athletes must invest individual and shared efforts to reach a common goal. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a convenience sample of 15 Catalan professional coaches (3 women and 12 men, 3 each from the following sports: volleyball, basketball, handball, soccer, and water polo) to gain their views of three perceived effort-related dimensions: physical, psychological, and tactical. From a theoretical thematic analysis, it was found that the perception of effort is closely related to how effort is distributed within the team. Moreover, coaches viewed physical effort in relation to the frequency and intensity of the players' involvement in the game. They identified psychological effort in situations where players pay attention to proper cues, and manage emotions under difficult circumstances. Tactical effort addressed the decision-making process of players and how they fulfilled their roles while taking into account the actions of their teammates and opponents. Based on these findings, a model of perceived distributed effort was developed, which delineates the elements that compose each of the aforementioned dimensions. Implications of perceived distributed effort in team coordination and shared mental models are discussed.
Women's water polo world championships: technical and tactical aspects of winning and losing teams in close and unbalanced games.
J Strength Cond Res. 2014 Jan;28(1):210-22. doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182955d90.
Lupo C, Condello G, Capranica L, Tessitore A.
This study aimed to compare the technical and tactical aspects between winning and losing teams in close (i.e., 1-3 goals of difference) and unbalanced (i.e., >3 goals of difference) elite women's water polo games. A notational analysis was performed on 45 games to evaluate occurrence of action, mean duration, action outcome, origin and execution of shot, offensive and defensive role, and arrangement of even, counterattack, power play, and transition situations. Independent 2-sided t-tests were applied to show differences (p < 0.05) between teams. Regarding close games, effects emerged for action outcome (counterattack: lost possessions; power play: goals, no goal shots), origin (even: zone 1, zone 4; counterattack: zone 1, zone 5) and execution (even: off-the-water shots; counterattack: shots after > than 2 fakes; power play: drive shots) of shots, offensive even arrangements (6 vs. 6/5 vs. 5; 2 vs. 2/1 vs. 1), and role. Regarding unbalanced games, differences emerged for the occurrence of action (even, counterattack), duration (even; power play), action outcome (even: goals, penalties; counterattack: goals, no goal shots, penalties; power play: goals, no goal shots; transition: lost possessions), origin (even: zone 2, zone 4; counterattack: zone 5) and execution (even: free throws, drive shots; counterattack: drive shots, shots after > 2 fakes; power play: drive shots, shots after 1 fake) of shots; offensive even arrangements (2 vs. 2/1 vs. 1), and role; and defensive even arrangements (pressing, zones 1-2, zone M, zones 2-3-4). Differences between close and unbalanced games underlining that water polo performance should be analyzed in relation to specific margins of victory. Therefore, water polo coaches and physical trainers can plan a sound training session according to the most important aspects of close (opponent's exclusion, center forward play, and power play actions) and unbalanced (defensive skills) games.