Loading...
2 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
- ANALYSIS OF OFFENSIVE AND DEFENSIVE ACTIONS OF YOUNG SOCCER GOALKEEPERSPublication . Santos, João; Sousa, Paulo Malico; Pinheiro, Valter; SANTOS, FERNANDO JORGE LOURENÇO DOSPurpose. The study aimed to investigate the defensive and offensive technical tactical actions of elite young football goalkeepers. Methods. The goalkeepers who participated in our study (n = 3; mean age: 16.6 years) had 8 years of experience in the position, were Portuguese, and competed in the Portuguese National Championship U-17. Thirty championship games were observed. The observational instruments used were constructed and validated for the investigation, and the technicaltactical actions were coded with the Lince® software. The data were processed through a descriptive analysis, by using the Microsoft Excel® computer program. Results. Defensive actions with most occurrences were goal defence (25.33 ± 8.14), deviation to punch (13.67 ± 12.5), with 2 hands (45.66 ± 21.38), and in zone 1 (50.33 ± 34.81). Offensive actions started more frequently with delayed pass (38.33 ± 28.01), for zone 1 (28.7 ± 20.60). The goalkeepers executed goal kick most frequently (17.33 ± 14.29), followed by short hand replacement (16.67 ± 12.06) and short pass (14.33 ± 10.02). The preferred pass zone was 9 (17.33 ± 10.26), and actions sought to initiate positional attack (86 ± 61.02). Conclusions. In the defensive process, the goalkeepers’ actions are mostly focused on the objective of goal defence; in the offensive process, technical actions with the hands and feet are important in the participation in positional attack construction.
- Mixed Method Research on Football Coaches’ Competitive BehaviorPublication . Rodrigues, José; Rodrigues, Filipe; Rescende, Rui; Espada, Mário; SANTOS, FERNANDO JORGE LOURENÇO DOSObjective: The purpose of this study was to present the reliability of three validated measures, namely the System of Analysis of Instruction in Competition, the Questionnaire on Coach Instructional Behavior Expectations, and the Questionnaire on Coach Instructional Behavior Perception that could be used in a mix-method approach. Methods: Three instruments underwent a robust process of construct and reliability analysis. Inter− and intra-observer reliability was tested for the observational instrument using Cohen’s k-agreement measure. Reliability values above 0.85 were considered as a good agreement between and within observers. To verify the internal consistency of the questionnaires, the correlation coefficients were considered. Results: The results related to intra-observer and inter-observer reliability showed that intra-observer reliability k-agreement values ranged between 0.912 and 1 for observer 1, and 0.82 and 1 for observer 2. For inter-observer reliability, k-agreement values ranged between 0.885 and 1 between observers. Thus, values for reliability are above acceptable. The correlation coefficient values recorded for the questionnaires on instruction expectations in the competitive moment were above 0.82 and significant (p < 0.05), and for the questionnaire on instruction perception in competition above 0.88 and significant (p < 0.05). The pilot study showed some divergent results across expectations, behavior during competition, and perception about the instruction behavior. Conclusion: The observational system and the expectations and perceptions questionnaires, used in a complementary way, can be considered as a mix-method approach for studies aiming to examine coaches’ competitive behavior.