dissertation 2016

‘Can beach soccer be used as a defensive training device for association football?’

A case study approach on the 2014 European beach soccer league

A dissertation submitted by

Robert Steadman-Trenear

In partial completion of the award of

BSc (Hons) Sports Development and Coaching Sciences

‘I hereby declare that the dissertation submitted is wholly the work of

Robert Steadman-Trenear

Any other contributors or sources have either been referenced in the prescribed manner

or are listed in the acknowledgements together with the nature and scope of their

contribution’

Faculty of Management

Bournemouth University

2016

Robert Steadman-Trenear Declaration

i

Dissertation declaration I agree that, should the University wish to retain it for reference purposes, a copy of my dissertation may be held by Bournemouth University normally for a period of three academic years. I understand that once the retention period has expired my dissertation will be destroyed. Confidentiality I confirm that this dissertation does not contain information of a commercial or confidential nature or include personal information other than that which would normally be in the public domain unless the relevant permissions have been obtained. In particular, any information which identifies a particular individual’s religious or political beliefs, information relating to their health, ethnicity, criminal history or gender, has been made anonymous, unless permission has been granted for its publication from the person to whom it relates. Ethical and Health & Safety issues I confirm that the on-line ethics checklist was completed and that any ethical considerations associated with the proposed research were discussed with my tutor and an appropriate research strategy was developed which would take them into account. I also confirm that any potential health & safety risks associated with the proposed research were discussed with my tutor and where necessary, appropriate precautions were documented, including an appropriate risk assessment. Copyright The copyright for this dissertation remains with me. Requests for Information I agree that this dissertation may be made available as the result of a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act.

Signed: Name: Robert Steadman-Trenear Date: Programme:

Robert Steadman-Trenear Abstract

ii

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to ascertain whether beach soccer could be used as a defensive

training device for association football. Defensive key performance indicators (KPIs) were

gathered from previous research and formed the research hypotheses for which beach soccer

data tested against.

KPIs and variable outcomes were formulated into a flowchart and then a tagging panel in

Dartfish 8 analysis software. 27 matches were analysed from the 2014 European beach soccer

league (EBSL). Post descriptive comparison to association football, Chi-square and Fisher

exact tests were used to test the significance of variables. Where possible, values of KPI

significance were compared to previous association football results.

Data analysis revealed that 8 of 9 defensive KPIs from association football were significantly

(P<0.05) comparable to beach soccer; implying that playing styles are consistent between the

two sports. Thus, given the overwhelming research support for the use of small sided games

(SSGs) and the physiological benefits of training on sand, beach soccer is discussed as a

suitable possibility for defensive training.

Word count: 9,995

Robert Steadman-Trenear Table of contents

iii

Table of contents

1.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Aim .................................................................................................................................. 2 1.2 Objectives ........................................................................................................................ 2

2.0 Literature Review ................................................................................................................. 3 2.0.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 3

2.1 Coaching recall ................................................................................................................ 3 2.1.1 The role of performance analysis .............................................................................. 3

2.2 Previous notational research in association football ........................................................ 5 2.2.1 Previous defensive research in association football .................................................. 5

2.3 Defensive KPIs in association football ............................................................................ 7 2.3.1 Possession regain attempts ........................................................................................ 8 2.3.2 Defending corners ..................................................................................................... 9 2.3.3 Clearances from corners ......................................................................................... 10 2.3.4 Defending throw-ins ............................................................................................... 10 2.3.5 Duels ....................................................................................................................... 11

2.4 SSGs in association football .......................................................................................... 11 2.4.1 Technical benefits of SSGs in association football ................................................. 12

2.5 Physiological benefits of sand training .......................................................................... 12 2.6 Summary ........................................................................................................................ 13

3.0 Hypothesis.......................................................................................................................... 14 3.1 Research hypotheses ...................................................................................................... 14

3.0 Methodology ...................................................................................................................... 16 3.0.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 16

3.1 Ethical considerations .................................................................................................... 16 3.2 Research approach ......................................................................................................... 16

3.2.1 Research design ...................................................................................................... 17 3.2.2 Research strategy .................................................................................................... 17

3.3 Case study ...................................................................................................................... 18 3.3.1 Sample selection ..................................................................................................... 18

3.4 KPIs selected for analysis .............................................................................................. 18 3.4.1 KPI definitions and operational rules ..................................................................... 19

3.5 Pilot study ...................................................................................................................... 19 3.5.1 Intra and Inter observer studies ............................................................................... 19

3.6 Research procedure ........................................................................................................ 23 3.6.1 Data collection ........................................................................................................ 27

3.7 Statistical analysis .......................................................................................................... 27 3.8 Summary ........................................................................................................................ 29

4.0 Results ................................................................................................................................ 30 4.0.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 30

4.1 Possession regain type ................................................................................................... 30 4.1.1 Possession regain location ...................................................................................... 31

4.2 Corner path ..................................................................................................................... 33 4.2.1 Corner technique ..................................................................................................... 34 4.2.2 Defensive strategy ................................................................................................... 35 4.2.3 Clearances from corners ......................................................................................... 36

4.3 Defending throw ins ....................................................................................................... 37 4.4 Duel type ........................................................................................................................ 38 4.5 Duel location .................................................................................................................. 39

Robert Steadman-Trenear Table of contents

iv

4.6 Summary ........................................................................................................................ 40

5.0 Discussion .......................................................................................................................... 41 5.0.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 41

5.1 Possession regain type ................................................................................................... 41 5.1.1 Research hypothesis 1 ............................................................................................. 41

5.2 Possession regain location ............................................................................................. 42 5.2.1 Research hypothesis 2 ............................................................................................. 42

5.3 Corner path ..................................................................................................................... 43 5.3.1 Research hypothesis 3 ............................................................................................. 43

5.4 Corner technique ............................................................................................................ 44 5.4.1 Research hypothesis 4 ............................................................................................. 44

5.5 Defensive strategy during corners ................................................................................. 45 5.5.1 Research hypothesis 5 ............................................................................................. 45

5.6 Clearances from corners ................................................................................................ 46 5.6.1 Research hypothesis 6 ............................................................................................. 46

5.7 Defending throw-ins ...................................................................................................... 47 5.7.1 Research hypothesis 7 ............................................................................................. 47

5.8 Duel type ........................................................................................................................ 47 5.8.1 Research hypothesis 8 ............................................................................................. 47

5.9 Duel location .................................................................................................................. 48 5.9.1 Research hypothesis 9 ............................................................................................. 48

5.10 Summary ...................................................................................................................... 49 6.0 Conclusion and recommendations ..................................................................................... 50

6.0.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 50 6.1 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 50 6.2 Recommendations for future research ........................................................................... 51

7.0 Reference list ..................................................................................................................... 52

8.0 Appendices ......................................................................................................................... 62 8.1 Appendix A – Physiological benefits of SSGs in association football .......................... 62 8.2 Appendix B – Ethics checklist ....................................................................................... 63 8.3 Appendix C – Operational rules .................................................................................... 64 8.4 Appendix D – Flowchart definitions .............................................................................. 65 8.5 Appendix E – Tagging panel created in Dartfish for data collection ............................ 71

Robert Steadman-Trenear List of tables

v

List of tables

Table 1: Previous research conclusions on possession regain attempts in association football……………………………………………………………………........………8 Table 2: Previous research conclusions on corner kicks in association football…………..…..9 Table 3: Previous research conclusions on clearances from corner kicks in association football……………………………………………………………………………..…10 Table 4: Previous research conclusions on throw-ins in association football………………..10 Table 5: Previous research conclusions on duels in association football…………………….11 Table 6: Defensive KPIs ascertained from association football research used for analysis….21 Table 7: Inter observer results from pilot study…………………………………………..…..24 Table 8: Intra observer results from pilot study……………………………………………....24 Table 9: Possession regain type definitions prior to pilot study……………………………...25 Table 10: Redefined possession regain type definitions post inter observer study………..…25 Table 11: Inter observer result for possession regain type post definition change…………...25 Table 12: Flowchart outcomes of possession regain attempts in terms of success………..…33 Table 13: Descriptive comparison of possession regain type success between association football and beach soccer…………………………………………………………..…33 Table 14: Chi-square analysis displaying the relationship between possession regain type and success in beach soccer…………………………………………………….34 Table 15: Descriptive comparison of possession regain location success between association football and beach soccer………………………………………………..34 Table 16: Chi-square analysis displaying the relationship between possession regain location and success in beach soccer…………………......................………………..35 Table 17: Descriptive comparison of the relationship between corner path and conceding a goal in association football and beach soccer……………………...36 Table 18: Fisher’s exact test displaying the relationship between corner path and conceding goals in beach soccer………………………………………………....36 Table 19: Descriptive comparison of the relationship between corner technique and conceding a goal in association football and beach soccer……………………....37

Robert Steadman-Trenear List of tables

vi

Table 20: Fisher’s exact test displaying the relationship between corner technique and conceding goals in beach soccer…………………………………..….37 Table 21: Descriptive comparison of the relationship between defensive strategy during corners and conceding a goal in association football and beach soccer…………………………………………………………...…38 Table 22: Fisher’s exact test displaying the relationship between defensive strategy and conceding goals in beach soccer………………………………………..38 Table 23: Descriptive analysis of the relationship between defensive strategy and corners cleared in association football and beach soccer………………………..39 Table 24: Chi square analysis displaying the relationship between defensive strategy and corners cleared in beach soccer…………………………………………39 Table 25: Descriptive analysis displaying the relationship between throw-ins and goals conceded in beach soccer and association football………………………..40 Table 26: Chi square analysis displaying the relationship between set piece and goals conceded in beach soccer………………………………………………..…40 Table 27: Flowchart outcomes of duels in terms of success………………………………….41 Table 28: Descriptive comparison of duel type success between association football and beach soccer………………………………………………………….….41 Table 29: Chi square analysis displaying the relationship between duel type and success during beach soccer………………………………………………...42 Table 30: Descriptive comparison of duel location success between association football and beach soccer……………………………………………………………..42 Table 31: Chi square analysis displaying the relationship between duel location and success during beach soccer…………………………………………….43 Table 32: Possession regain variable defintions……………………………………………...58 Table 33: Defending corner and throw-in definitions……………………………………...…59 Table 34: Clearance variable definitions……………………………………………………..61 Table 35: Duel variable definitions……………………………………………………...……62

Robert Steadman-Trenear List of figures

vii

List of figures

Figure 1: Flowchart created for the collection of data………………………………………..27 Figure 2: Transverse pitch segmentation for association football analysis…………………..28 Figure 3: Transverse pitch segmentation used for beach soccer analysis………………….…29 Figure 4: Pitch zones used for beach soccer analysis……………………………………...…29 Figure 5: Screenshot of Dartfish 8 window with KPI trigger panel……………………….....30 Figure 6: Screenshot of possession regain tagging panel………………………………….…63 Figure 7: Screenshot of defending corner or throw-in tagging panel 1……………………....64 Figure 8: Screenshot of defending corner or throw-in tagging panel 2………………………65 Figure 9: Screenshot of defending corner or throw-in tagging panel 3……………………....66 Figure 10: Screenshot of duel tagging panel………………………………………………….67

Robert Steadman-Trenear List of equations

viii

List of equations

Equation 1: Calculating Kappa statistic: K=(po-pc)/(1-pc)

Equation 2: Calculating subgroup percentages: % of subgroup = (number of subgroup/number

of whole group) x 100

Robert Steadman-Trenear Introduction

1

1.0 Introduction The increasing use of performance analysis in association football is arguably a consequence

of the continual rise in competitive demands (Anderson and Sally 2013). Subsequently,

coaches are better informed regarding tactics, preparation and physiological data (Hughes and

Franks 2004). This has impacted the manner in which training sessions and procedures are

planned (O’Donoghue 2010).

Notational research has shown the increasing importance of defensive play (Shafizadeh et al.

2013); attributing tournament success to defensive KPIs (Luhtanen et al. 2001). Regarding

training, small sided games (SSGs) have been depicted by research as an effective device, due

to increased player interactions (Jones and Drust 2007; Katis and Kellis 2009). Consequently,

coaching research suggests that training sessions should be centered around this structure

(Hill-Haas et al. 2010; Serra-Olivares et al. 2015).

It has been established that sand based training has numerous advantages. Whilst benefiting

physiological output, it has been ascertained that the surface places less stress on the

musculoskeletal system (Impellizzeri et al. 2006; Gaudino et al. 2013).

Beach Soccer is the newest form of association football, whereby play is commenced on a

smaller, 5 per side sand field (Witzig, 2006). Castellano and Casamichana (2010) found beach

to soccer to be an intermittent physical activity, whereby exercise intensity varies over brief

rest periods. This characteristic is shared by association football (Williams 2013).

Whilst beach soccer is an SSG format of association football played on sand, there is no

research to suggest that playing styles are similar to allow a clear transition. Therefore, this

research will ascertain whether defensive KPIs and ensuing playing styles are consistent

between the two sports. Thus, determining whether coaches could use beach soccer as a

training device.

Robert Steadman-Trenear Introduction

2

1.1 Aim The primary aim of this study is to discover whether beach soccer can be used as an SSG

during defensive training sessions for association football.

1.2 Objectives The principle objective is to detect whether defensive key performance indicators (KPIs) from

association football apply to beach soccer. Association football KPIs have been sourced from

research and separated into three sections:

1. Possession regain attempts

2. Defending corners and throw-ins

3. Duels This information is used to create a tagging panel in Dartfish 8 analysis software. Post

compilation of data, playing styles can be determined in beach soccer and compared to the

association football hypotheses ascertained from the literature.

Robert Steadman-Trenear Literature review

3

2.0 Literature Review 2.0.1 Introduction The following section will establish the need for performance analysis, establish defensive

playing styles and KPIs in association football, highlight the effectiveness of small sided

games (SSGs) and debate the suitability of a sand based sport for training purposes.

2.1 Coaching recall Franks and Miller (1986) found 30 novice coaches to recall approximately 42% of critical

events. During later research, they discovered 36 experienced Level 3 soccer coaches could

recall no more than 40% of key performance events (Franks and Miller 1991). Furthermore,

Laird and Waters (2008) found novice soccer coaches to recall 59% of critical events.

However, according to Nelson et al. (2014) sample size has a significant bearing on the

strength of research. Laird and Waters (2008) used a sample size of 8 coaches, in accordance

to Jones (2014), this sample size is too small to wield effective statistical power.

Nevertheless, poor recall accuracy of information is not a phenomenon only shared by soccer

coaches. Franks’ (1993) comparative study between unexperienced and experienced gymnast

coaches, concluded no difference in recalling actual performance. Maslovat and Franks

(2008) imply inaccurate human observation may be the result of increased arousal level, poor

attention and observer bias. This hypothesis is shared by Cohen et al. (2011), whose research

concluded emotions are integral to how one conceptualises a situation or scenario.

O’Donoghue (2014) further suggests that due to poor recall, coaches’ assessment on

performance and subsequent feedback is affected. With the increasing demands of

professional sport, coaches need as much information regarding performance as possible in

order to plan appropriately for competition (Potrac et al. 2013; Robinson 2014).

2.1.1 The role of performance analysis According to seminal authors, performance analysis is used to overcome the limitations of

coaching recall, allowing greater specificity in feedback (Hughes and Franks 2004;

O’Donoghue 2014). Providing feedback to athletes, is an essential variable when improving


4

sport performance (Docheff 2010; Wright and O’Halloran 2013). Research suggests

performance analysis permits feedback to be as precise a possible (Wulf et al. 2002).

Research has established that coaches have a distorted evaluation of performance (Franks and

Miller 1991). During preparation therefore, coaches’ training sessions could be ineffective

(Hughes 2008). Consequently, it is argued that performance analysis should be embedded

within the coaching process (Lyle 2002; Hughes and Bartlet 2002; Wright et al. 2013). An

accurate objective analysis system allows coaches to monitor performance effectively and

therefore plan improvements concerning individuals and teams (Hughes and Bartlett 2002).

Although performance analysis is widely considered an effectual tool for coaches, there is

debate amongst research over quantitative and qualitative uses. During a study using video

analysis of volleyball, Liebermann et al. (2002) conclude qualitative reflection an effective

method in recognising technical errors. The subjective nature of coaches’ observations

however, has resulted in formative authors asserting that objective, notated feedback is

required to gain a deeper understanding (Hughes 2008; O’Donoghue 2010). This is reiterated

by Murray et al. (1997) who discovered notational analysis accounted for an increase in future

winning shots during squash performance. Furthermore, research entails that athletes retain

60% of feedback (Rosado et al. 2008; Januario et al. 2013), thus Raiola et al. (2012) argue the

importance of focusing appraisal on quantifiable KPIs.

Nevertheless, a study conducted by Nelson et al. (2014) found that although quantifiable data

was deemed effective for analysing performance, receptiveness to feedback was dependent on

subjective processes such as athlete-coach relationships. This suggests coaches should

consider performance analysis in the art and science balancing act of successful coaching

(Chambers 1997).

Essentially, performance analysis aims to progress understanding of sporting practice by

providing augmented quantified information to coaches (McGarry et al. 2013). Forming the

basis of performance analysis is biomechanics and notational analysis. Biomechanics derives

around individual technique, whereas notational analysis is utilised for tactical matters and

discovering playing styles (Hughes and Franks, 2004).


5

2.2 Previous notational research in association football Notational research in association football stems from the findings of Reep and Benjamin

(1968). The weight of ensuing studies has mostly considered how goals are scored (McGarry

et al. 2013).

Consequently, coaches are now aware that the majority of goals are scored within the penalty

area (Njororai; 2004; Michailidis et al. 2013; Ruiz-Ruiz et al. 2013), regaining the ball in the

opposition half is advantageous (Garganta et al. 1997; Barreira et al. 2014; Vogelbein 2014)

and set pieces contribute a large number of goals (Jinshan et al. 1993; Grant et al. 1999; Sousa

and Garganta 2001). Advocates of “possession football” have challenged Reep and and

Benjamin’s (1968) findings, and thus a debate on retaining possession amongst researchers

has developed. Whilst some studies relate ball domination to team success (Bate 1988;

Carmichael et al. 2001; Jones et al. 2004), others argue this is dependent on various

situational and match determinants (Lago and Martin 2007; Lago-Penas and Dellal 2010).

2.2.1 Previous defensive research in association football There is a lack of clarity concerning defensive approach and therefore coaches may remain

unaware of the advantages it can have. Authors have suggested this is due to the notion of

defensive performance indicators being harder to quantify (Kuper and Szymanski 2012;

Anderson and Sally 2013). Research shows goals scored per match has declined across world

football (Hughes 1996; Lanham 2005; Kuper and Szymanski 2012), arguably this is the result

of the increased competiveness between teams (Anderson and Sally 2013). Consequently,

authors have called for increased research of defensive strategy and practices (Grehaigne et al.

2002).

After conducting a study of the 1990 World Cup, Partridge et al. (1993) implore teams not to

defend deep and encourage regaining possession as fast as possible. Conversely, James et al.

(2002) argue these findings an oversimplification, as they found the ploy of dropping deep an

effective tactical choice, depending on the technical ability of opposition. In a more recent

study, Tenga et al. (2010) contest Partridge et al.’s (1993) hypothesis, finding counterattacks a

more effective goal-scoring tactic than elaborate possession attacks.


6

Amongst research, alterations in defensive strategy have been detected over time. During a

comparison between the 1996-2000 European Championships, Luhtanen et al. (2001) noted

an increase of tackles and interceptions throughout Euro 2000, suggesting an international

recognition of the importance of defensive organisation. During this study, it was noted that

tackles were attempted more frequently than interceptions, producing a 47% success rate, yet

interceptions were successful on 95% of attempts (Luhtanen et al. 2001). During the 2010

World Cup however, Barreira et al. (2014) revealed that on average, interceptions were

attempted more per game than tackles. These findings were consistent with Almeida et al.

(2014), whose study on the 2011-2012 UEFA Champions League showed a total of 2011

interceptions were attempted, as opposed to 849 tackles. Interestingly, Barreira et al.’s (2014)

study revealed the four most successful teams of the tournament all attempted more

interceptions than tackles per game.

This reiterates the suggestion that tackling has become less prominent over time due to stricter

officiating and increased technical ability of attacking players (Schultz 2015). Alternatively,

the rise in interceptions could be interpreted as a result of teams’ reluctance in committing to

tackles due to preference of sound defensive organization (Welsh 1999). As goal-scoring has

become less frequent across world football, it could be argued that teams are seeking more

defensive assurance due to games being decided by smaller margins (Anderson and Sally

2013).

During Franks and Miller’s (1991) study, it was noted that although coaches were incapable

of recalling more than 40% of pertinent information, all subjects improved their results

concerning the event ‘taking of shots’. This could reiterate Kuper and Szymanski’s (2012)

implication that attacking football is over-romanticized. Bishovets’ (1993) tactical analysis of

the 1990 World Cup concluded that participating teams’ effectiveness depended on their

attacking, rather than defensive ability. Yet, Dufour (2003) found that the winners of the

tournament, Germany, had the best average of successful aerial and ground duels. Shafizadeh

et al. (2013) demonstrate that the two most successful teams of Euro 2012 (Italy and Spain)

were ranked 1st and 2nd in relation to ground duels won, aerial duels won, tackles won and

interception success. Furthermore, Luhtanen et al. (2001) found a statistical significance

(P=0.001) between defensive variable success and tournament ranking during Euro 1996.

This reiterates the common hypothesis that effective defence often wins championships

(Moskowitz and Wertheim 2011; Kahane and Shmanske 2012).


7

Although limited, recent research suggests a trend between teams’ defensive capabilities and

tournament success. This coincides with recent coaching literature, which argues good

defensive organisation makes teams extremely difficult to score against (Welsh 1999; Bate et

al. 2014). If defensive ability has become key to success in soccer, it could be argued that

coaches should seek new and innovative ways in which to enhance their teams’ capabilities

(Cassidy et al. 2015).

2.3 Defensive KPIs in association football KPIs allow quantification of performance (Hughes and Bartlett 2004), and are used by

analysts and coaches for comparison against previous accumulated data (Carling et al. 2013).

During a study assessing performance consistency of teams competing in the 2012 European

Championship, Shafizadeh et al. (2013) recognised defensive KPIs as: tackles, interceptions,

clearances, and duels. There are a wealth of studies concerning corner kicks (Taylor et al.

2005; Baranda and Lopez-Riquelme 2012; Pulling et al. 2013). This would suggest that this

type of set play has an obvious importance. A recent paper by Pulling et al. (2013) provides

more depth, concerning defensive strategies utilized for marking during corner kicks.

Throw-ins have received less attention, however authors suggest a throw-in can reach a

distance of 30 meters (de Carnys and Lees 2008) and pose a direct threat to defence

(Luxbacher 1999). Furthermore, research by Chang (1979) discovered a throw-in as a more

accurate skill than the corner kick, concluding a throw-in can locate a team-mate in a scoring

position easier. Yet, it must be considered that this research could be outdated (Gratton and

Jones 2010).

However, as the size of a beach soccer pitch is much smaller than a standard football pitch,

throw-ins are capable of being thrown straight into the goal. Considering this and the dearth

of research concerning throw-ins, defending throw-ins has been included as a defensive KPI

for this research. According to beach soccer rules, all free kicks are taken as a direct shot at

goal. Due to this rule disparity with association football, free kicks will not be considered

during this research. For the purpose of this study therefore, defensive KPI are divided into

the following categories:


8

• Possession regain attempts

• Defending corners and throw-ins

• Duels

2.3.1 Possession regain attempts

Table 1: Previous research conclusions on possession regain attempts in association football

Author (sample) KPI Research conclusions

Luhtanen et al. (2001)

Euro 2000 – 31 matches

Almeida et al. (2014)

UEFA Champions League

2011-12 - 28 matches

Possession regain type Possession regain location

Tackles produced 49% success,

interceptions produced 92% success

48.2% of successful regains occurred in

the defensive zone. 32.8% occurred in the

defensive midfield. 16.2% in the offensive

midfield and 2.8% in the offensive zone

Possession regain research mostly considers the type of attempt and zone in which they occur.

According to Witzig (2006) playing styles of association football alter over time. Arguably

then, the studies conducted by Almeida et al. (2014) and Barreira et al. (2014) are more suited

for this research than the work of Luhtanen et al. (2001). However, these more recent papers

do not offer success rates of either tackles nor interceptions. Nonetheless, according to

Hughes (1996) and Lanham (2005), in-play tactical trends change over longer periods of time.

Therefore, Luhtanen et al’s (2001) success analysis of possession regain attempts is deemed

appropriate for comparison.

Research concerning location success of possession regains is more conclusive. The findings

of Almeida et al. (2014) are coherent with previous studies (Reilly and Gilbourne 2003;

Carling et al. 2005; Gomez et al. 2012) who argue efficiency improves when regaining the

ball in defensive and defensive midfield locations.


9

2.3.2 Defending corners Table 2: Previous research conclusions on corner kicks in association football

There is debate amongst research considering effectiveness of corners. According to Armatas

and Yiannakos (2006) study on the 2004 European Championship, 10.8% of the tournament’s

goals were scored from corners. This coincides with Sousa and Garganta’s (2001)

examination during the 1994 World Cup; they found 13% of goals ensued from corners.

However, in a sample of 1139 corners over domestic and international tournaments between

2010-2012, Casal et al. (2015) report only 2.2% of corners produced goals. When conducting

quantitative research, large sample sizes wield greater analytical significance (Klenke 2015).

Therefore, when discussing the results of beach soccer corner kicks, Casal et al.’s (2015)

research will be used as a reference. Contrary to coaching literature (Wymer 2004; McCarthy

2007), the findings of Casal et al. (2015) display that corners are not an effective goal-scoring

method. Alternatively, this research could suggest an alternative approach should be taken to

improve goal-scoring chances from corners.


Casal et al. (2015)

World Cup 2010,

Euro 2012,

Champions League 2010-

11 – 1139 corner kicks

Taylor et al. (2005)

English Premier League

2001-02 – 217 corner kicks

Pulling et al. (2013)



Corner path Corner technique Defensive strategy

3.1% of corners delivered on the ground

produced a goal. 2.1% of corners

delivered aerially produced a goal

5.1% of in-swing corners, 1.6% of out-

swing corners, 0% of straight/driven, 0%

of chipped corners and 3.7% of short

corners produced a goal

2.3% of corners marked zonally

conceded a goal. 4.3% of man marked

corners conceded a goal


10

2.3.3 Clearances from corners

Table 3: Previous research conclusions on clearances from corner kicks in association football


Pulling et al. (2013)



Corner

clearances

When teams applied man-marking,

52.2% of corners were cleared out of the

penalty area. When teams applied zonal

marking, 53.5% of corner kicks were

cleared out of the penalty area

There are two main methods adopted when defending corner kicks, zonal marking and man-

marking (Pulling et al. 2013). Delegating zones is argued to reduce decision making, whereby

defensive players are able to concentrate on solely clearing the ball outside the penalty area

(Welsh 1999). Edward (2003) concurs this hypothesis, stating defenders can maintain their

shape using this system. Conversely, Pulling et al. (2013) debate problems that can occur in

areas where spatial responsibilities overlap.

2.3.4 Defending throw-ins

Table 4: Previous research conclusions on throw-ins in association football


Armatas and Yiannakos

(2006)

Euro 2004 – 32 matches

Defending

throw-ins

1.4% of throw-ins produced goals

In comparison to Casal et al.’s (2015) study, it could be argued that Armatas and Yiannakos

(2006) results show little significance of success between corners (2.2%) and throw ins

(1.4%).


11

2.3.5 Duels

Table 5: Previous research conclusions on duels in association football

Duels are defined as the action between two opposition players trying to gain control of the

ball (Dellal et al. 2012); often referred to as 50/50s (Wymer 2004). Success is determined as

gaining possession of the ball (Dellal et al. 2012). Unlike interceptions and tackles, teams can

not set traps to cause duels, they have an unpredictable nature (Dellal et al. 2012). Often, the

quickest player to react wins the duel (Gatz 2009).

Authors illustrate winning duels as an essential factor in effectual defensive play (Vermeulen

2004; Doucet 2005). Accordng to Delall et al. (2010), teams who win the greater amount of

duels have a greater chance of winning the match. Consequently, coaches should utilise

small-sided games (SSG) to better prepare players for duels (Delall et al. 2010)

2.4 SSGs in association football Due to large pitch size, limitations in ball control and vast player interactions, association

football is an extremely complex game (Aguiar et al. 2012). Recently, this complexity has

been addressed by coaches seeking to reduce interactions and to increase decision making

whilst maintaining fundamental attributes of the game (Hill-Haas et al. 2009a; Katis and

Kellis 2009). These practices are termed SSGs and are currently a very popular training

mechanism for all ages and standards (McGarry et al. 2013).


Dellal et al. 2011

Spanish La Liga and


2006-07 – 76 matches

Duel type

Duel location

Ground duels were won on 51.2% of

attempts, aerial duels 46.2% of attempts

Ground duels were won on 53.6% of

attempts in defensive areas and

41.2% won in attacking areas. Aerial

duels were won on 56.5% of attempts in

defensive areas and 41.6% in attacking

areas.


12

2.4.1 Technical benefits of SSGs in association football Whilst there is debate regarding physiological benefits (Appendix A), SSGs are suggested to

provide a more effective technical training stimulus, as the reduction of players’ increases the

technical actions and decisions for those involved (Jones and Drust 2007; Katis and Kellis

2009). The flexible nature of SSGs allows coaches to implement over-load and under-load

scenarios (Aguiar et al. 2012). Hill-Haas et al. (2010) found this an effective method for

recreating defensive situations that players would find themselves in during 11 a-side play.

During a comparison between 8v8 and 4v4 SSGs, Jones and Drust (2007) found 4v4 players

had more positional freedom as they were continually involved in both attacking and

defensive phases of play. This suggests smaller sided games gives players a holistic

experience (Clemente et al. 2012). Considering this, Katis and Kellis (2009) imply youth

players should spend a large amount of training time in smaller sided games. This thought

complies with Serra-Olivares et al. (2015) who argue SSGs exaggerate certain game elements,

allowing learners to explore a tactical problem deeper, while maintaining primary rules.

Research by Dellal et al. (2011) declare that a technical response of SSG, is that a greater

amount of ball possessions are lost. These findings correlate with Abrantes et al. (2012), who

imply the frequent possession transitions of SSGs allow for effective defensive recovery and

organisation drills.

In southern European countries SSGs such as futsal and beach soccer have become

increasingly popular (Andersson et al. 2008; Brito et al. 2011). Some authors attribute the

perceived technical excellence of Southern American players due to their participation of

these SSGs in their youth (Skubala and Burkett 2015).

2.5 Physiological benefits of sand training In a comparison of maximal and shuttle sprints between natural grass and sand, Gaudino et al.

(2013) found a significant increase on energy cost, metabolic power (P=0.001) and

deceleration (P<0.05) of professional football players on sand. Thus, research concluded that

on sand it is possible to perform maximal intensity sprints with higher energy expenditure and

metabolic values without reaching maximum speed. Gaudino et al. (2013) imply that recorded

deceleration values are a valuable consideration when planning for agility exercises.

Additionally, sprinting on sand produced significantly (P=0.001) smaller impact shocks and


13

limited stretch of the involved muscles than grass; offering a valid alternative to traditional

training, injury prevention and rehabilitation plans (Gaudino et al. 2013).

Considering plyometric training, Impellizzeri et al. (2006) argue that firm surfaces place

considerable demands on leg muscles, achilles and patellar tendons. Whereas sand training

significantly (P=0.001) improved squat jump height, whilst demonstrating less muscle

soreness than grass. Consequently, Impellizzeri et al. (2006) concur with Gaudino et al.

(2013), suggesting the use of sand may be useful during intensified training periods to reduce

the stress on the musculoskeletal system.

During a comparative study of internal training between sand and grass, Binnie et al. (2013)

found significantly higher (P<0.05) blood lactate and heart rate responses of athletes during

the sand session. Furthermore, no differences (P>0.05) were observed between surfaces for

the blood markers of muscle inflammation, damage and hemolysis. Furthermore, a running

time trial conducted 24 hours later was performed significantly (P=0.001) faster

after the sand session compared with grass. The results of Binnie et al. (2013) suggest that

interval training on sand can produce a greater physiological response, without any additional

detriment to next day endurance performance.

2.6 Summary From the literature review it is apparent that performance analysis should be used to inform

coaches (Hughes and Franks 2004). Although there is debate over strategy, defensive KPIs

from association football are clearly outlined within research. Arguably, evidence suggests a

correlation between effective defensive play and competition success (Luhtanen et al. 2001).

Regarding training, there is a wealth of research regarding the positive effects of SSGs (Jones

and Drust 2007; Hill-Haas et al. 2010). There is further substantial evidence concerning the

physiological benefits of sand-based exercises (Impellizzeri et al. 2006; Gaudino et al. 2013;

Binnie et al. 2013). However, there is a distinct lack of research concerning SSGs or

association football practice on sand.

Robert Steadman-Trenear Hypothesis

14

3.0 Hypothesis The following hypotheses have been ascertained from association football research. These

will be used for comparison against the collected beach soccer data, ultimately answering the

research question.

3.1 Research hypotheses Research hypothesis 1: Interceptions will be significantly more successful than tackles.

Null hypothesis 1: Interceptions will not be significantly more successful than tackles

Null hypothesis 2: Possession regain attempts will not be significantly more successful in the

defensive (zones 1-4) and mid-defensive sectors (zones 5-8) than the mid-offensive (zones 9-

12) and offensive sectors (zones 13-16).

Research hypothesis 3: There will be no significant difference between goals conceded from

aerial or ground corner kicks

Null hypothesis 3: There will be a significant difference between goals conceded from aerial

or ground corner kicks

Research hypothesis: 4: No particular corner technique will produce significantly more goals

Null hypothesis 4: A particular corner technique will produce significantly more goals


zonal or man marking strategies

Null hypothesis 5: There will be a significant difference between between goals conceded

from zonal or man marking strategies

Research hypothesis 6: There will be no significant difference between corners cleared during

zonal and man marking strategies

Null hypothesis 6: There will be a significant difference between corners cleared during zonal

and man marking strategies

Robert Steadman-Trenear Hypothesis

15


corners and throw-ins

Null hypothesis 7: There will be a significant different between goals conceded from corners

and throw-ins

Research hypothesis 8: There will not be a significant difference between duel type success

Null hypothesis 8: There will be a significant difference between duel type success

Research hypothesis 9: Duels will be significantly more successful in the defensive sector

(zones 1-8) than the offensive sector (9-16)

Null hypothesis 9: Duels will not be significantly more successful in the defensive sector


Robert Steadman-Trenear Methodology

16

3.0 Methodology 3.0.1 Introduction In order to answer the research question, 27 matches were sampled from the 2014 EBSL. The

following sections provide insight to the methodological approach undertaken.

3.1 Ethical considerations Prior to starting any research project, any ethical issues associated with the research

methodology must be identified and resolved (Gratton and Jones 2004). An ethics checklist

was signed (Appendix B), confirming the morality of the study.

3.2 Research approach This study was exploratory in nature; aiming to investigate an under-theorised topic and

develop fundamental insight (Andrew et al. 2011; McNabb 2015). Aforementioned within the

literature review, there is a dearth of research concerning beach soccer, therefore an

exploratory design was deemed most appropriate.

The research philosophy implemented within this study was of a positivist approach.

Positivist research is concerned with revealing a reality (Schinke and Hanrahan 2009) or

providing explanations (Armour and Macdonald 2012) based on observable and measurable

facts (Jones 2014). Positivists conduct studies’ within the subject’s natural environment,

followed by critical investigation (Sparks 2009). This enables the researcher to gain a

thorough understanding of reality (Edwards and Skinner 2009). Analysis of beach soccer was

conducted within the natural setting of a tournament, therefore allowing a comprehensive

evaluation of reality.

The associated methods of positivist research have been critiqued due to the tendency of

excluding qualitative processes attached by subjects to their actions (Markola and Silk 2011).

Yet, these arguments do not apply to the research design, as there was no intention to explore

the thoughts and feelings of participants in regards to their defensive play.

Positivist research can reveal patterns of results and can be applied to predict certain events

(Braithwaite and Baxter 2005). Results of this study, will allow association football coaches


17

to assess whether beach soccer has similar KPI characteristics and therefore determine if it

should be used as a SSG training device. According to seminal coaching authors (Lyle 2002;

Jones and Kingston 2013; Robinson 2014), gaining knowledge of new, effective training

mechanisms is essential for coaches.

From acknowledging previous research, it is hypothesised that defensive KPIs from

association football will be consistent with beach soccer, allowing the latter to be used for

SSG training. Therefore, this study takes a deductive approach as it aims to test theory

through observations (Smith 2010). This is coherent with O’Donoghue (2010), who implies

performance analysis research predominately adopts a deductive approach.

3.2.1 Research design The research conducted was of a descriptive nature as it attempts to answer the who, what,

where, when and how of a reality (Morgan and Summers 2005). This provides very factual

and accurate information, allowing systematic description of a situation (Schwarz and Hunter

2008; Andrew et al. 2011).

Following Gratton and Jones’ (2010) recommendation, the phenomenon was observed with

no interaction with the activity nor the participants. This allows a strong natural observation,

as behaviour should not be simulated (Moran 2004). Despite the research observations and

analysis being conducted post performance, behavioural implications may act as a limitation.

These limitations could include; spectators watching live, number of cameras present for

broadcasting and interaction between players and game scenario (Tucker et al. 2005). Yet,

O’Donoghue (2010) suggests a large sample size, negates these limitations and allows an

accurate data production. Further still, upon considering related research papers, these

limitations have not had a significant impact. Therefore, it was deemed unnecessary to

consider adaption to research methodology.

3.2.2 Research strategy Positivists assume that behaviours can be observed numerically and therefore be objectively

analysed (Gratton and Jones 2004). Quantitative data collection uses numeric measurement

and analysis to answer specific phenomena (O’Donoghue 2013) and therefore is typically

associated with positivist, deductive designs (Jones 2014). The collected numerical data then

can be statistically analysed (Jones 2014). Quantitative methods are often used by


18

performance analysts, due to it’s objective nature (Baca 2014). This was deemed more

appropriate than qualitative analysis, since the research method did not aim to explore

subjective matters such as thoughts and feelings of the participants (Gratton and Jones 2004).

3.3 Case study Under theorised phenomenon are best examined from a case study perspective (Yin 2009;

Andrew et al. 2011). This method allows for a holistic understanding of set issues (Gratton

and Jones 2004). Analysts regularly conduct case studies aiming to understand occurrences

within performance (O’Donoghue 2009). Critics of case studies argue data is subject to risk of

observer bias (Skinner et al. 2014). Subsequently, data must undergo reliability evaluation

(Hughes and Franks 2004; O’Donoghue 2009).

3.3.1 Sample selection In total, 3590 defensive actions were recorded from the 2014 EBSL.

From reviewing previous research papers, international tournaments are regularly used within

performance analysis for collecting data. Furthermore, single tournaments have been

specifically used to analyse defensive actions (Suzuki and Nishijima 2003; Lago-Penas et al

2007; Dellal et al. 2010; Shafizadeh et al. 2013; Evangelos et al. 2013; Almedia et al. 2014;

Barreira et al. 2014). Therefore, the 2014 EBSL was deemed appropriate for this research.

3.4 KPIs selected for analysis As discovered in the Literature review, the following KPIs were selected for application to

beach soccer.

Table 6: Defensive KPIs ascertained from association football research used for analysis

KPI

Possession regain type Location of possession regain Corner path Corner technique Defensive strategy during corners Clearances from corners Defending throw-ins Duel type Location of duel


19

3.4.1 KPI definitions and operational rules Formative authors state that during quantitative research, variables must be precisely defined

to ensure accurate measurement (Hughes and Franks 2004; O’Donoghue 2009) Definitions of

KPIs and flowchart outcomes were ascertained from previous research and coaching literature

to allow an accurate comparison of results (Appendix D). Operational rules (Appendix C) are

implemented by the researcher to avoid any ambiguity during reliability studies (O’Donoghue

2009; Rubin and Babbie 2010).

This research aims to form the basis of future studies concerning beach soccer, therefore

defining terms will assist future researchers (Marczyk et al. 2005). Although reliability and

validity issues will always exist, any method of reducing them must be adopted (Cohen et al.

2007), as this directly correlates with the strength of the research (O’Donoghue 2009).

3.5 Pilot study A pilot study identical to the research project is necessary to identify any errors encompassed

within the methodology (Tenebaum and Driscoll 2005). The pilot study should use a small

sample (Tenenbaum and Driscoll 2005), yet it must test all KPI selected for analysis (Meeker

and Escobar 2014). As suggested by Babbie (2012), a random sampling method was devised,

thus 1 match was selected randomly from the sample size. Random sampling avoids selection

bias and therefore a miss representation of the sample (Ott and Longnecker 2010).

This pilot sample aimed to determine whether the planned data collection system was

appropriate for the research hypothesis (O’Donoghue 2010). In order to develop the

methodology into its final state, O’Donoghue and Holmes (2014) imply pilot data and

operational definitions must undergo reliability tests.

3.5.1 Intra and Inter observer studies There is a strong correlation between consistency of results and quality of research (Gratton

and Jones 2010). Due to the subjective processes of human observation, operation of

notational systems may be susceptible to error (Hughes and Franks 2004). O’Donoghue

(2014) categorised errors as: definitional, perceptual and data entry. Following Bland and

Atlman’s (1986) implication that inter-operator testing is not sufficient alone, reliability


20

analysis was conducted via both intra and inter-operational agreement studies (O’Donoghue

2014).

Intra analysis measures the observational consistency of one viewer (Picardi and Masick

2013). Thus, analysis was conducted by the author, followed by a repeat observation (Table

6). Following Pulling et al.’s (2013) suggestion, the ensuing intra analysis took place 3 weeks

post initial notation. This ensured observational bias was minimised (Pulling et al. 2013).

According to O’Donoghue (2013) the most effective form of reliability testing in

performance analysis is inter reliability, whereby the notational system is verified by an

external subject. Therefore, an impartial performance analyst conducted the inter-observation

study.

Kappa testing was used to calculate the percentage of recording error amongst variables

(O’Donoghue 2014). This ensures the observers’ agreement is not by chance alone (Peters

and O’Donoghue 2013). Results are expressed as the degree of achievement between a range

of -1.0 and +1.0 (McGinn et al. 2004). This is calculated using the following equation:

Equation 1: Equation for calculating Kappa statistic:

K=(po-pc)/(1-pc)

Where K is Kappa, po is the amount of agreement and pc is the chance of guessing. Altman

(1991) aligned the Kappa statistic range with definitions of strength agreement:

0.8 or above = “Very good”

0.61 – 0.8 = “Good”

0.41 – 0.6 = “Moderate”

0.21 – 0.4 = “Fair”

0.00 – 0.2 = “Poor”

For the necessary strength of agreement Kappa values should be a minimum of 0.8

(O’Donoghue 2013).


21

Table 7: Inter observer results from pilot study

KPI Kappa Value (k)

Strength of Agreement (Altman 1991)

Possession regain type Location of regain Success of regain Corner path Corner technique Defensive strategy Goals scored from corner Corner clearance Goal scored from throw-in Duel type Location of Duel Success of Duel

0.80 0.93 0.91 0.91 0.83 0.81 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.89 0.90 0.87

“Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good”

Table 8: Intra observer results from pilot study

3.5.2 Considerations Consulting the intra reliability results (Table 8), it was deemed necessary to redefine the

“possession regain type” definitions (Tables 9 and 10). Once this had been reconstructed, a

second inter observer test was conducted. Results displayed an increased rate of agreement

(Table 11), consequently completing the pilot study.

KPI Kappa Value (k)


Possession regain type Location of regain Success of regain Corner path Corner technique Defensive strategy Goal scored from corner Corner clearance Goal scored from throw-in Duel type Location of Duel Success of Duel

0.71 0.91 0.87 0.85 0.82 0.81 1.0 1.0 0.86 0.88 0.90 0.86

“Good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good” “Very good”


22

Table 9: Possession regain type definitions prior to pilot study

Table 10: Redefined possession regain type definitions post inter observer study

Table 11: Inter observer result for possession regain type post definition change

Possession Regain Type Variable Definition Tackle Interception

An attempt to remove the ball from another player (McCarthy 2007). An attempt to intervene a moving ball during play (Birk et al. 2003).

Possession Regain Type Variable Definition Tackle Ground Interception Aerial Interception

When the defender attempts to dispossesses the opponent of the ball through a physical challenge or defensive pressure (Barreira et al. 2011; Almeida et al. 2014). When the defender attempts to prevent a ball passed by an opponent (below waist) reaching its intended receiver by contacting the ball and keeping his own team in possession of the ball (Barreira et al. 2014; Almeida et al. 2014). When the defender attempts to prevent a ball passed by an opponent (above waist) reaching its intended receiver by contacting the ball and keeping his own team in possession of the ball (Barreira et al. 2014; Almeida et al. 2014).

KPI Kappa Value (k)


Possession regain type 0.82

“Very good”


23

3.6 Research procedure Considering the vast range of performance variables and outcomes in association football

(Carling et al. 2005), it is important to create a logical structure to the game when notating

(Hughes 2008). Therefore, under Hughes and Franks’ (2004) recommendation, a flowchart

was designed (Figure 1).


24

Possession Regain Attempt

Defending Corner and Throw In

Duels Defensive Action

Type Ground, Aerial

Interception Tackle

Where the possession regain attempt took place

Success?

Set play conceded

Attempt Failed

Regained Possession

Corner Throw-in

Run-inStanding

Where the corner took

place

Clearance

Type

Where the duel took place

Aerial Ground

Duel Won

Set play conceded

Success?

Corner or Throw in?

Outcome

Clearance lands outside the penalty

area

Clearance lands inside penalty area

Foul Conceded

Foul ConcededPossession Regain Attempt

Duel

Opposition keep possession

Goal Scored?

Yes No

Team out of Possession

Open play or set-play?

Open play or set play

Location of first touch from corner

Where the throw-in took

place

Location of first touch from throw-in

Success?

Technique

Set play conceded

Open Set-play Open Set-play

Foul Conceded

Duel Lost

Shot conceded

Shot conceded

Goal Scored?

Yes No

Shot conceded

Goal Scored?

Yes No

Shot conceded

Goal Scored?

Yes No

PathGroundAerial

Technique

InswingOutswing

ShortStraight/Driven

Chipped

Defensive Strategy Man markingZonal

Goalkeeper intercepts

No outcomeFigure 1: Flowchart created for the collection of data


25

Research depicts that conceding fouls (Tucker et al. 2005), set-plays (Lago-Penas et al. 2013)

and shots (Evangelos et al. 2013) are all negative variable outcomes of actions during

association football. Logically, failed attempts, for example missed tackles, were included as

a negative variable outcome. These variables were combined and integrated within the

flowchart.

Within performance analysis, it is common practice to divide the playing area into numbered

zones (Hughes and Franks 2004; O’Donoghue 2009), this permits positional data to be

analysed (Carling et al. 2005). According to Almeida et al. (2014) pitch segmentation

encourages a very good strength of agreement between kappa tests. Considering research on

defensive play in association football, authors suggest dividing the pitch into 4 transverse

zones; defensive sector (DS), mid-defensive sector (MDS), mid-offensive sector (MOS) and

offensive sector (OS) (Figure 2) (Barreira et al. 2014; Almeida et al. 2014).

Figure 2: Transverse pitch segmentation for association football analysis (adapted from

Barreira et al. 2014, p.63)

Therefore, for the purpose of this research, the beach soccer playing surface was allocated the

same transverse segmentation (Figure 3).


26

Figure 3: Transverse pitch segmentation used for beach soccer analysis (adapted from

Barreira et al. 2014, p.63)

To increase specificity, Carling et al. (2005) suggest further dividing zones into smaller

proportions. Following this, defensive sectors were broken down into 16 even sized zones to

provide greater specificity (Figure 4) (Carling et al. 2005).

Figure 4: Pitch zones used for beach soccer analysis


27

3.6.1 Data collection After creating the flowchart, KPIs were used to create a tagging panel in the analysis software

Dartfish 8 (Figure 5) (Appendix E). Dartfish allows the input of video alongside the tagging

panel, enabling users to time code specific events (Hughes and Franks 2015). Arguably,

computerised notation allows a faster collation of data (Reilly and Williams 2003).

Nevertheless, errors still occur and therefore reliability studies are needed for assessment of

data collection methodology (Ott and Longnecker 2010).

Figure 5: Screenshot of Dartfish 8 window with KPI trigger panel

3.7 Statistical analysis Following O’Donoghue and Holmes’ (2014) recommendation, data collected in Dartfish was

exported to Microsoft Excel for compilation. Amongst authors, it is widely recognised that

the statistical package for the social sciences (SPSS) is an effective software to analyse

statistics (Field 2009; Kinnear and Gray 2010; O’Donoghue 2013).

According to Hughes and Bartlett (2002) statistical analysis within football is often of a

descriptive nature, whereby data is presented as ratios of success. This allows comparison

between past and future research (Pulling et al. 2013). Therefore, variable results will be

initially displayed as a success comparison between beach soccer and association


28

football. Some of the abovementioned research expresses the results as means. In order to

convert their findings into percentages, Hughes et al. (2002) suggest using equation 2:

Equation 2: Calculating subgroup percentages

% of subgroup = (number of subgroup/number of whole group) x 100

Equation 2 will be utilised on all collected beach soccer data in order to provide a comparison

between findings. Additionally, Dellal et al. (2011) used only 2 sectors when analysing duel

location. Therefore, equation 2 was applied, with the subgroups being calculated as:

Defensive sector = (zones 1-4 + zones 5-8)

Offensive sector = (zones 9-12 + zones 13-16)

Once all data was converted into percentages, Chi-square testing was utilised to test each

research hypothesis. Chi-square tests are a common method by which relationships between

two or more variables can be examined (Field 2009). This method allows the researcher to

ascertain how the observed data matched expectations (Wetcher-Hendricks 2011). This mode

of statistical test was deemed appropriate due to frequent use in previous association football

research (Armatas and Yiannakos 2006; Taylor et al. 2008; Pulling et al. 2013).

As suggested by Pulling et al. (2013), the alpha level for statistical significance was set at

0.05. Null hypotheses could be rejected if P<0.05, as this demonstrates significance in the

findings (Rutherford 2011). If the measure of effect from the significance results of a 2x2

cross tabulation is questionable, phi (ɸ) should be reported as the effect size (O’Donoghue

2012). Thus, the ɸ value was reported concerning the significance (P=0.043) between corner

path and goals conceded. For ɸ, 0.1 represents a small effect, 0.3 a medium effect and 0.5 a

large effect (O’Donoghue 2012).

For any chi square test to be valid, at least 80% of the expected frequencies must be 5 or

greater (O’Donoghue 2009; Field 2009). When analysing corner path, corner technique and

defensive strategy the expected frequencies failed this standard. To avoid making Type 1

errors, Fisher’s exact test was utilised for the analysis of these KPI (Field 2009).


29

Where possible, initial descriptive analysis is followed by a statistical significance

comparison of variables between association football and beach soccer. However, some of the

utilised association football research did not include the desired significance results of

variables. Therefore, for statistical analysis concerning defensive strategy (Pulling et al. 2013)

and corner technique (Taylor et al. 2008) Fisher’s exact test was used on the previous research

data in order to provide a comparison.

3.8 Summary The methodology undertaken was designed to produce results that coincided with the research

aim. Following reliability studies, the methodology was considered appropriate, and thus data

collection on 27 matches commenced. The following section will provide results from the

data collected

Robert Steadman-Trenear Results

30

4.0 Results 4.0.1 Introduction A total of 2384 possession regain attempts were recorded; 243 corners; 690 throw-ins; and

260 duels. The following section firstly provides a descriptive comparison between beach

soccer and association football. Where possible, statistical comparison between beach soccer

and association football are made.

4.1 Possession regain type According to previous research, success is determined as regaining possession of the ball

(Luhtanen et al. 2001). Thus, to gain an initial understanding of the statistical relationship

between possession regain type and success in beach soccer, negative and positive outcomes

from the flowchart were categorised into the following on SPSS:

Table 12: Flowchart outcomes of possession regain attempts in terms of success

Flowchart outcome Success

Attempt failed Foul conceded

Set-play conceded Shot conceded

Regained possession

No No No No Yes

Table 13: Descriptive comparison of possession regain type success between association

football and beach soccer

Possession

regain type

Association

football

frequency (31

matches)

Association

football success

(%)

Beach soccer

frequency (27

matches)

Beach soccer

success

(%)

Tackles

Interceptions

4154

3503

49

92

1315

1066

39

59.8


31

Equation 1 was utilised to calculate regained possession percentage. From Table 13, it is

conclusive that interceptions are a more effective method than tackling to regain possession in

both association football and beach soccer. Nonetheless, tackles in beach soccer are the most

used possession regain attempt.

Table 14: Chi-square analysis displaying the relationship between possession regain type and

success in beach soccer

Possession regain type Regained possession

Total No Yes

Tackle

Count 798 514 1315

Expected Count 449.2 421.7 1315.0

Interception

Count 428 637 1066

Expected Count 364.1 314.9 1066.0

Total

Count 1126 1151 2277

Expected Count 1126.0 1151.0 2277.0

The beach soccer results (Table 14) show there is a significant relationship (P=0.000)

between the type of possession regain, showing interceptions are more successful than

tackles. This correlates with the results of Luhtanen et al. (2001), who declare there is a

significant relationship (P=0.005) between successful interceptions and tournament progress

in association football.

4.1.1 Possession regain location

Table 15: Descriptive comparison of possession regain location success between association

football and beach soccer

Possession regain location Association football success (%)

Beach soccer success (%)

Defensive sector Mid-defensive sector Mid-offensive sector Offensive sector

48.2 32.8 16.2 2.8

60 52

29.8 20.7


32

Descriptively, beach soccer shares similar results with association football in the respect that

the further forward teams attempt to regain the ball, the less success they have.

Table 16: Chi-square analysis displaying the relationship between possession regain location

and success in beach soccer

Possession regain location Regained Possession

Total No Yes

Defensive sector

Count 307 460 767

Expected Count 262.0 246.0 767.0

Mid defensive sector

Count 480 519 999


Mid offensive sector

Count 349 148 497


Offensive sector

Count 90 24 116


Total

Count 1126 1151 2277

Expected Count 1126.0 1151.0 2277.0

For beach soccer, the results show a statistical significance (P=0.000) between location of

possession regain and success. The defensive and mid defensive sector significantly surpassed

the expected count of regaining possession, contrasting the results of the mid offensive and

offensive sectors. This reiterates the descriptive analysis, and demonstrates a significant

similarity between beach soccer and association football.


33

4.2 Corner path

Table 17: Descriptive comparison of the relationship between corner path and conceding a

goal in association football and beach soccer

Corner path Association football goal production

(%)

Beach soccer goal production

(%) Ground Aerial

3.1 2.1

8.3 2.2

Table 17 shows a marginally larger percentile difference between corner path and goal

production in beach soccer compared to association football. Ground corners produce

marginally more goals during beach soccer. Nonetheless, these results imply corners do not

pose a viable threat to defences in either sport.

Table 18: Fisher’s exact test displaying the relationship between corner path and conceding

goals in beach soccer

Corner path Goal conceded

Total No Yes

Aerial

Count 179 4 183


Ground

Count 55 5 60


Total

Count 234 9 243


According to Table 18, there is a significant relationship (P=0.043) between corner path and

goals conceded in beach soccer. Corners delivered on the ground contribute to significantly

more goals conceded than aerially delivered corners. However, the ɸ value (0.14) signifies

that corner path has a small effect on conceding a goal. Casal et al. (2015) demonstrated no

significance (P=0.77) between corner path and goals conceded in association football.


34

4.2.1 Corner technique

Table 19: Descriptive comparison of the relationship between corner technique and conceding

a goal in association football and beach soccer

Corner technique Association football goal production

(%)

Beach soccer goal production

(%) In-swing Out-swing Straight/driven Chipped Short

5.1 1.6 0 0

3.7

0 5.3 5.6 2.7 6.7

Table 19 shows minimal disparity in corner technique success between association football

and beach soccer. Additionally, no particular technique in either game has a significantly

greater success rate.

Table 20: Fisher’s exact test displaying the relationship between corner technique and

conceding goals in beach soccer

Corner technique Goal conceded

Total No Yes

Chipped

Count 108 3 111


In-swing

Count 27 0 27


Out-swing

Count 18 1 19


Short

Count 14 1 15


Straight/Driven

Count 67 4 71


Total Count 234 9 243



35

Table 20 shows there is no significant relationship (P=0.453) between corner technique and

goals conceded in beach soccer. In comparison to association football, Fisher’s exact test

conducted on the research data of Taylor et al. (2008) found no significance (P=0.565)

between corner technique and goals conceded. The results demonstrate a similarity between

beach soccer and association football. Additionally, corners are not currently an effective

goal-scoring method in either beach soccer or association football.

4.2.2 Defensive strategy

Table 21: Descriptive comparison of the relationship between defensive strategy during

corners and conceding a goal in association football and beach soccer

Defensive strategy Association football goals conceded

(%)

Beach soccer goals conceded

(%) Zonal marking Man marking

2.3 4.3

4 3.4

Descriptively, there is little difference in both association football and beach soccer to which

defensive strategy contributes to conceding the least goals.

Table 22: Fisher’s exact test displaying the relationship between defensive strategy and

conceding goals in beach soccer

Fisher’s exact analysis demonstrates no statistical significance (P=1.000) between marking

strategy and conceding goals. This corresponds with the data analysis of Pulling et al. (2013),

Defensive strategy Goal conceded

Total No Yes

Zonal marking

Count 120 5 125

Expected Count 120.4 4.6 125.0 Man marking

Count 114 4 118


Total

Count 234 9 243



36

who found no significance (P=1.000) between marking strategy and conceding goals in

association football.

4.2.3 Clearances from corners

Table 23: Descriptive analysis of the relationship between defensive strategy and corners

cleared in association football and beach soccer

Defensive strategy Association football corners cleared

(%)

Beach soccer corners cleared

(%) Zonal marking Man marking

53.5 52.5

8% 3.4%

From this analysis, corners are cleared far more often in association football than beach

soccer. However, both games show little significance in which strategy clears corners the

most.

Table 24: Chi square analysis displaying the relationship between defensive strategy and

corners cleared in beach soccer

Table 24 shows there is no significance (P=0.127) between defensive strategy and corners

cleared in beach soccer. This relates with the findings of Pulling et al. (2013) who found no

Defensive strategy Corner cleared

Total No Yes

Zonal marking

Count 115 10 125


Man marking

Count 113 4 117


Total

Count 228 14 242

Expected Count 228.0 14 242.0


37

statistical significance (P=0.764) between defensive strategy and corners cleared in

association football.

4.3 Defending throw ins

Table 25: Descriptive analysis displaying the relationship between throw-ins and goals

conceded in beach soccer and association football

Set piece Association football goals conceded

(%)

Beach soccer goals conceded

(%) Corner Throw-in

2.2 1.4

3.7 2.3

Table 25 demonstrates little difference in goals conceded when comparing corners and throw-

ins during both association football and beach soccer. This poses a similarity in the respect

that neither set piece poses a viable threat to defences.

Table 26: Chi square analysis displaying the relationship between set piece and goals

conceded in beach soccer

The chi square analysis shows that in beach soccer, corners do not contribute significantly

more goals (P=0.246) than throw-ins. This outlines the descriptive analysis.

Set piece Goal conceded

Total No Yes

Corner

Count 233 9 242


Throw-in

Count 674 16 690


Total

Count 907 25 932



38

4.4 Duel type Following the same procedure as possession regain type, positive and negative variable

outcomes from the flowchart were categorised into the following for SPSS:

Table 27: Flowchart outcomes of duels in terms of success

Flowchart outcome Success

Duel lost Foul conceded

Set-play conceded Shot conceded

Duel won

No No No No Yes

Table 28: Descriptive comparison of duel type success between association football and beach

soccer

Duel type Association football

success (%)

Beach soccer success (%)

Ground Aerial

51.2 46.2

57.9 55.9

Equation 1 was utilised to calculate duel success. Table 28 shows there is a limited percentile

difference between duel type and success in both association football and beach soccer.

Table 29: Chi square analysis displaying the relationship between duel type and success

during beach soccer

Duel type Duel won

Total No Yes

Ground

Count 55 78 133


Aerial

Count 56 71 127


Total

Count 111 149 260



39

According to the chi square analysis, there is no significant relationship (P=0.655) between

duel type and success in beach soccer. This reiterates the descriptive results and implies a

similarity between association football and beach soccer.

4.5 Duel location

Table 30: Descriptive comparison of duel location success between association football and

beach soccer

Duel location Association football success

(%) Beach soccer success

(%) Defensive sector Offensive sector

55.1 41.4

61.2 39.6

Table 30 demonstrates a similarity between association football and beach soccer that there is

a large percentile disparity between duel success in the defensive sector than the offensive

sector.

Table 31: Chi square analysis displaying the relationship between duel location and success

during beach soccer

Table 31 reveals a significant relationship (P=0.006) between duel location and success

during beach soccer. This confirms the descriptive analysis in that duels attempted in the

defensive sector produce more success.

Duel location Duel won

Total No Yes

Defensive sector

Count 82 129 211


Offensive sector

Count 29 19 48


Total

Count 111 149 259



40

4.6 Summary From the analysed data, it has been ascertained that beach soccer shares the following playing

styles with association football:

• Possession regain type success • Possession regain location success • Corner technique goal success • Defensive strategy success during corners • Defensive strategy and corners cleared • Goal success from throw-ins and corners • Duel type success • Duel location success

Corner path goal success was the only KPI that produced dissimilarities between the two sports.

Robert Steadman-Trenear Discussion

41

5.0 Discussion 5.0.1 Introduction The following chapter provides a discussion of results and any subsequent implications. The

hypotheses based on association football research are tested against the beach soccer data.

Ultimately this will discuss results in relation to the research question.

5.1 Possession regain type 5.1.1 Research hypothesis 1 Null hypothesis 1: Interceptions will not be significantly more successful than tackles. From the data analysis, it was found that interceptions were significantly more successful than

tackles. Thus null hypothesis 1 is rejected and research hypothesis 1 is accepted.

Arguably, stopping goals being conceded are the sole defensive aims of any invasion game

(Breed and Spittle 2011) thus regaining possession is imperative (Light et al. 2013). Given the

increased player interactions of SSGs (Hill-Haas et al. 2009a; Katis and Kellis 2009) and the

research results (Table 14), beach soccer arguably shares the most important defensive

playing style and thus can be suggested as an effective training device for practicing regaining

possession.

It has been ascertained from research that sand-based training enhances physiological output

(Gaudino et al. 2013; Binnie et al. 2013), including maximal anaerobic exercises, such as

maximal sprints (Gaudino et al. 2013). Research has shown that both beach soccer and

association football are intermittent physical activities, relying heavily on the anaerobic

energy system (Castellano and Casamichana 2010). Therefore, maximal anaerobic defensive

exercises such as recovery runs and pressing (Curneen 2015), performed on sand, would

benefit association football players. Now that is evidence to show similarities in defensive

playing style (Tables 14 and 15), beach soccer can now be considered an effective

physiological and technical defensive training device.

As in association football, interceptions are significantly more successful in beach soccer, but

tackles were attempted more frequently. This reflects the results of Luhtanen et al. (2001),


42

yet contradicts more recent research (Almedia et al. 2014; Barreira et al. 2014), showing

interceptions as the most frequent attempt of regain possession in association football.

Debatably, this could imply beach soccer is different to current association football defensive

playing styles. However, from the literature review, it has been ascertained that time (Witzig

2006) and arguably the use of performance analysis (Hughes and Franks 2004; O’Donoghue

2014), has caused this shift of playing style. As a new sport, beach soccer coaches have

arguably not had time nor the knowledge to consider which regain type should be used more.

The outcomes of this research could influence beach soccer coaches and thus influence an

alteration in playing style.

Ultimately, the aim of this research is to effect the training of current association football

players. It would be fair to assume, current players would train reflecting current playing

styles (Bate et al. 2014). The only concern would be that the sand surface would not permit

this (Scarfone et al. 2009). Yet, results show that sand will not be a constraint for this

particular KPI, thus allowing the recommendation of beach soccer for defensive association

football training.

Considering previous research methodologies, possession regain success is ultimately defined

as gaining possession of the ball (Luhtanen et al. 2001; Almeida et al. 2014; Barreira et al.

2014) (Appendix D). However, given that throw-ins pose a very small threat to defences in

both sports (Table 25), there is room to suggest that a tackle made in an outnumbered

scenario, in the defensive zone, conceding a throw-in, constitutes success. Arguably this could

be a limitation of research.

5.2 Possession regain location 5.2.1 Research hypothesis 2 Null hypothesis 2: Possession regain attempts will not be significantly more successful in the

defensive (zones 1-4) and mid-defensive sectors (zones 5-8) than the mid-offensive (zones 9-

12) and offensive sectors (zones 13-16).

Results from this research have shown that in beach soccer possession regains are

significantly more successful in the defensive and mid-defensive sectors than the mid-

offensive and offensive sectors. Thus rejecting the null hypothesis and accepting the research

hypothesis.


43

According to Launder and Piltz (2013) actions in relation to pitch geography ultimately

constitute tactics and therefore playing styles. Considering there is a significant similarity in

ball recovery location, with of half the outfield players available, confirms that defensive

shape and organisational styles are consistent between the two sports. This could imply that

when playing association football or beach soccer, defensive style is not dependant on the

number of players. It can be argued therefore, under-load and over-load scenarios that are

deemed effective in SSG research (Aguiar et al. 2012) can be implemented during a beach

soccer practice. Thus players would be training in an environment where playing style is

realistic, taking all the benefits of an SSG practice whist gaining the physiological advantages

of training on sand.

5.3 Corner path 5.3.1 Research hypothesis 3 Null hypothesis 3: There will be a significant difference between goals conceded from aerial

or ground corner kicks

Results have shown that ground corners contribute to significantly more goals than aerially

delivered corners, thus accepting null hypothesis 3 and rejecting research hypothesis 3.

Disputably, the decreased number of players and the corner path difference to association

football could imply that corner kicks are not realistically comparable in beach soccer for

practice. Yet, the ɸ value (0.14) implies a small strength of significance and the sample size

used for beach soccer analysis (243 corners) was considerably smaller than the

comparison research of Casal et al. (2015) (1139 corners). Contemplating the weak ɸ value,

an increased sample size could show corner path as an insignificant factor in conceding goals

during beach soccer.

Considering the available research (Taylor et al. 2005; Pulling et al. 2013; Casal et al. 2015),

there lacks a distinct, consistent definition determining the end of a corner kick. Debatably,

the coding process adopted for this research, is not directly comparable to previous studies.

This could weaken any quantitative analysis and potentially makes comparisons unreliable

(O’Donoghue 2009). Yet, regardless of inconsistent methodologies, the comparison of results


44

demonstrates a regularity; concluding that corners are not a sustainable goal-scoring method

in beach soccer.

All factors considered, it is argued that whilst corner path results are not initially comparable

(Table 18), defending corners should not be discounted as these set-plays produce defensive

strategy practice and clearances which are significantly similar to association football (Tables

22 and 24). By not including corners during a beach soccer SSG, association football coaches

could limit their practice and thus player development.

5.4 Corner technique 5.4.1 Research hypothesis 4 Null hypothesis 4: A particular corner technique will produce significantly more goals

During beach soccer, there is no significant relationship between corner technique and

conceding goals, resulting in null hypothesis 4 being rejected and research hypothesis 4 being

accepted.

Whilst these results sanction the abovementioned argument, a combination of reduced pitch

size and variable definitions could bring findings into disrepute. The most common technique

for power and applying ball spin and thus swinging trajectory is the instep technique (Martin

2015). Taylor et al. (2005) found that swinging corners were most used during association

football; in-swing having the largest goal percentage (5.1%). To achieve a curved ball-flight,

plenty of power needs to be applied and the ball should spend considerable time in the air

(Brown 1991).

Considering the definition for a chipped technique (Appendix D), the decreased pitch size

could explain why the chipped technique was used on 45.7% of corners whereas in-swing and

out-swing were less favourable (Table 20).

Nevertheless, some chipped corners during the 2014 EBSL had a swinging trajectory, thus

possibly highlighting a discrepancy in the findings. However, chipped technique definitions

(Appendix D) in association football consider only foot positioning and ball height; thus,

these were the requisites for coding. There is no record in research concerning a swinging


45

chipped technique. Additionally, ascertaining ball trajectory proved difficult due to the short

distance between corner flag and defending goal.

Whilst the statistical analysis proves that set play styles are similar concerning outcomes, it

could be argued that corner techniques do not transfer between association football and beach

soccer. Thus it is suggested that defending corners can still be of benefit during a beach

soccer SSG, but defending a particular association football corner style is not practical.

5.5 Defensive strategy during corners 5.5.1 Research hypothesis 5 Null hypothesis 5: There will be a significant difference between between goals conceded

from zonal or man marking strategies

The beach soccer data shows there is no significant difference between goals conceded from

zonal or man marking strategies, thus rejecting null hypothesis 5 and accepting research

hypothesis 5.

This similarity between association football and beach soccer is perhaps the most important

regarding set-plays, as it provides scope for future practices. Given the possibility that some

corner styles do not overlap, it could be argued that this would not provide realism.

Nonetheless there is no research to suggest that defensive strategy deployed during corners in

association football is dependant on path or technique. This decision is made prior to matches

(Pulling et al. 2013). Thus defending corners during a beach soccer SSG would be an

effective organisational practice, especially given that technical interactions increase with

fewer players (Jones and Drust 2007; Katis and Kellis 2009). Consequently, a beach soccer

SSG would allow coaches to divide the corner defensive unit into small sections; giving these

players increased practice.


46

5.6 Clearances from corners 5.6.1 Research hypothesis 6 Null hypothesis 6: There will be a significant difference between corners cleared during zonal

and man marking strategies

Results of this research have shown there is no significant difference between successful

clearances during zonal and man marking strategies, thus rejecting null hypothesis 6 and

accepting research hypothesis 6.

It has been ascertained from research that plyometric training on sand improves jumping

ability, whilst reducing risk of injury (Impellizzeri et al. 2006). According to association

football coaching literature, powerful jumping is required to clear the ball, thus plyometric

training is utilised (Swinnen 2016). Given that 91.6% of corner kicks in association football

are delivered aerially (Casal et al. 2015), the majority of clearances are made with headers

(Drewett 2007). Beach soccer is significantly similar to association football concerning

clearances (Table 24). Consequently, beach soccer provides an SSG whereby association

footballers could improve their jumping ability whilst mutually benefitting their clearance

heading technique through increased repetition of actions. Additionally, players are less likely

to suffer from muscle soreness during this practice (Impellizzeri et al. 2006).

It can now be ascertained that the majority of KPIs concerning defending corner kicks transfer

between association football and beach soccer. Prior to this research, the in-play benefits of

SSGs were renowned (Jones and Drust 2007; Katis and Kellis 2009; Hill-Haas et al. 2010;

Aguiar et al. 2012). As a consequence of this study, SSGs can now be considered as a viable

practice method for defending corners. Given the non-existence of research regarding SSGs

as a training device for corners, association football coaches could alter their practices for

defending this set-play as a result of this study. It is a known advantage of SSGs that

conditions can be applied (Aguiar et al. 2012), therefore coaches can now focus corner

sessions on specific defensive players in a realistic environment where clearance repetitions

can be increased (Jones and Drust 2007; Katis and Kellis 2009).


47

5.7 Defending throw-ins 5.7.1 Research hypothesis 7 Null hypothesis 7: There will be a significant difference between goals conceded from corners

and throw-ins

During beach soccer, there is no significant difference between goals conceded from corners

or throw ins, thus rejecting null hypothesis 7 and accepting research hypothesis 7.

This significant similarity between sports is important as throw-ins are the most common set

play in association football (Carling et al. 2005). Now it has been ascertained that during both

games neither set play pose a major threat to defences, association football coaches will not

have to stop the practice every time a throw-in occurs during a beach soccer SSG. As implied

by Welsh (1999), this improves game flow and realism of a practice. Ultimately these

findings further support the argument that association football and beach soccer share specific

playing styles.

Again however, the comparable research of Armatas and Yiannakos (2006) lacks a clear

definition as to the end of the throw-in phase. Therefore, the coding process adopted in this

research could be inconsistent with previous findings. Nonetheless, a large sample size was

utilised and results proved consistent (Tables 25 and 26), thus indicating the methodology

strength (O’Donoghue 2009).

5.8 Duel type 5.8.1 Research hypothesis 8 Null hypothesis 8: There will be a significant difference between duel type success

Beach soccer results have shown no significant difference between duel type success, thus

rejecting null hypothesis 8 and accepting research hypothesis 8.

Descriptive results from association football show little percentile difference between duel

type and success (Table 28). This reiterates the literature suggestion that duels occur


48

randomly, as these results imply teams can not train to be more successful in a particular type

of duel. It has been discovered that beach soccer shares this characteristic (Tables 28 and 29).

Given the unpredictable nature of duels (Dellal et al. 2012), this comparison of results

demonstrates beach soccer shares a natural playing style similar to association football. It has

been discovered that sand based training significantly increases deceleration (P<0.05) values,

therefore Gaudino et al. (2013) imply sand based training can improve agility. Therefore,

using beach soccer as an SSG could improve association football players’ duel success.

5.9 Duel location 5.9.1 Research hypothesis 9 Null hypothesis 9: Duels will not be significantly more successful in the defensive sector


Results from this research have shown duels are significantly more successful in the defensive

sector (zones 1-8) than the offensive sector (9-16), thus rejecting null hypothesis 9 and

accepting research hypothesis 9.

Although association football research does not offer the exact same analysis, Dellal et al.

(2010) show a significance between player positions and duel success. Results show that

central defenders and full backs had significantly (P=0.001) greater values in duel success

than other playing positions. Furthermore, forwards had significantly (P=0.001) lower values

in duel success than other playing positions. Given the implication that defenders spend the

majority of game time in the defensive sector, and attackers in the offensive sector (Dellal et

al. 2010), it can be suggested that beach soccer and association football share a significantly

similar playing style in duel location.

Duels are an unpredictable KPI (Dellal et al. 2012). Now it has been ascertained that location

success is consistent between both sports implies they share a natural flow and subsequent

playing style.

The fact that duels in beach soccer, an unpredictable KPI (Dellal et al. 2012), share location

success with association football strongly suggests that both games share a natural flow and

subsequent playing style.


49

5.10 Summary As discussed, beach soccer shares 8 of the 9 defensive KPI hypotheses ascertained from

association football research. Thus, this research has established that defensive playing styles

are almost entirely consistent between the two sports. Arguably with an increased corner

sample size, all 9 research hypotheses would have been accepted. Therefore, not only is beach

soccer a suitable SSG, but results imply that specific corner organisation can be practiced in

this format.

Robert Steadman-Trenear Conclusion and recommendations

50

6.0 Conclusion and recommendations 6.0.1 Introduction This section will conclude the study and ultimately answer the research question.

Additionally, any study limitations will be expressed along with future research

recommendations.

6.1 Conclusion From this research it has been ascertained that the majority of defensive KPIs are significantly

similar to beach soccer. Certainly, 2 of 3 KPI categories outlined in the research objectives

are wholly consistent between the two sports. Arguably, corner path and technique findings

from association football research are not applicable due to disparities with beach soccer.

However, defensive outcomes from corners, such as organisaton strategy and clearances are

consistent between the two sports.

Findings from this research add to the modern implication that SSGs should be used in

association football training sessions. Moreover, results concerning defensive strategy and

clearances from corners suggest that SSGs can be utilised for corner practice; a factor not

considered in current research. Additionally, contemplating the suggestion that SSGs are

beneficial for youth player development (Katis and Kellis 2009), and a sand surface offers

ease on the musculoskeletal system (Gaudino et al. 2013), this research implies beach soccer

could be beneficial for adolescent training. Lastly, study adds to the literature premise that

performance analysis should be used to inform coaching decisions.

Where applicable, defensive playing styles are consistent between the two sports. Thus, given

the research support for SSGs and sand based training, this study has discovered that beach

soccer can be used as a defensive training practice for association football. Ultimately, this

study provides an alternative approach for association football coaches to plan their practices.

Robert Steadman-Trenear Conclusion and recommendations

51

6.2 Recommendations for future research When considering possession regain and duels, a systematic definition is required. Arguably,

other variables such as location, specific outcome and context need to be considered when

determining success. Nonetheless, this limitation is consistent throughout football research. It

is recommended therefore, future research thoroughly evaluates the outcomes of possession

regains and duels in relation to success.

As highlighted in the Discussion section of this study, a limitation that exists throughout

current research is the lack of definition concerning the end of a corner kick phase. Whilst

results remained consistent, to provide absolute clarity, it is recommended that future research

concerning beach soccer or SSGs follow the variable definitions of this study (Appendix D).

As discussed, a possible limitation developed regarding corner technique comparisons to

association football. However, this provides an opportunity for future research to identify the

range of new techniques used in beach soccer.

Considering methodological procedure, a possible limitation is the use of a single tournament.

According to O’Donoghue (2014), sampling one tournament may not accurately imitate

regular playing styles. Therefore, future notational analysis on beach soccer should sample a

number of tournaments from varying continental locations.

Robert Steadman-Trenear Reference List

52

7.0 Reference list Aguiar, M., Botelho, G. Lago, C. Maças, V. and Sampaio, J., 2012. A review on the effects of soccer small-sided games. Journal of human kinetics, 33 (1), 103-113 Almeida, C., Ferreira, A. and Volossovitch, A., 2014. Effects of match location, match status and quality of opposition on regaining possession in UEFA champions league. Journal of human kinetics, 41 (1) Altman, D.G., 1995. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman and Hall Anderson, C. and Sally, D., 2013. The numbers game: why everything you know about football is wrong. London: Penguin Andersson, H., Ekblom, B. and Krustrup, P., 2008. Elite football on artificial turf versus natural grass: Movement patterns, technical standards, and player impressions. Journal of sports science, 26, 113–122 Andrew, D., Pedersen, P. and McEvoy, C., 2011. Research Methods and Design in Sports Management. Illinois: Human Kinetics. Armatas, V. and Yiannakos, A., 2006. Evaluation of the goal scoring patterns in European championship in Portugal 2004. International journal of performance analysis in sport, 6 (1), 178-188 Armour, K. and Macdonald, D., 2012. Research methods in physical education and youth sport. London: Routledge Aroso J., Rebelo A.N. and Gomes-Pereira J., 2004. Physiological impact of selected game-related exercises. Journal of sports sciences, 22, 522 Babbie, E.,2012. The practice of social research. 13th edition. California: Wadsworth. Baca, A., 2014. Computer science in sport: research and practice. London: Routledge Barreira, D., Garganta, J. and Anguera, M.T., 2014. In search of nexus between attacking game-patterns, match status and type of ball recovery in European soccer championship 2008. 5th international christmas sport scientific conference: Qualitative and quantitative research in sport science. Bate, D., Bate, R. and Jeffreys, I., 2014. Soccer speed. Illinois: Human Kinetics Bate, R., 1988. Football chance: Tactics and strategy. In: T. Reilly, A. and Williams, A.M., eds. Science and Soccer. London: E. & F.E. Spon., 293-301 Binnie, M., Dawson, B., Arnot, M., Pinnington, H., Landers, G. and Peeling, P., 2014. Effect of sand versus grass training surfaces during an 8-week pre-season conditioning programme in team sport athletes. Journal of sports sciences, 32 (11), 1001-1012 Bishovets, A., Gadjiev, G. and Godik, M., 1993. Computer analysis of the effectiveness of collective technical and tactical moves in the matches of 1988 olympics and 1990 world cup. In: Reilly, T., ed. Science and football II. London: E. & F.E. Spon., 232-236


53

Bland, J.M. and Altman, D.G., 1986. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. The Lancet, 1, 307-310. Braithwaite, D.O. and Baxter, L.A., 2005. Engaging theories in family communication: Multiple perspectives. California: SAGE Breed, R. and Spittle, M., 2011. Developing games sense through tactical learning: A resource for teachers and coaches. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Brito, J., Krustrup, P. and Rebelo, A., 2011. The influence of the playing surface on the exercise intensity of small-sided recreational soccer games. Human movement science, 31 (4), 946-956 Brown, M., 1991. Soccer techniques in pictures. London: Penguin Carling, C., Williams, M.A. and Reilly, T., 2005. Handbook of soccer match analysis. London: Routledge. Carling, C., Wright, C. Nelson, L. and Bradley, P., 2013. Comment on ‘Performance analysis in football: A critical review and implications for future research’. Journal of sports sciences, 32 (1), 2-7. Carmichael, F., Thomas, D. and Ward, R., 2001. Production and efficiency in association football. Journal of sports economics, 2, 228 – 243 Carr, T. and Ferdinand, R., 2006. How to coach a soccer team: Professional advice on training plans, skills drills and tactical analysis. New York: Sterling Publishing Carrington, R., 2003. Thoughtful soccer: The think-first approach to playing and coaching. Pennsylvania: Reedswain Casal, C.A., Maneiro, R. Toni, A. Losada, J.L. and Rial, A., 2015. Analysis of corner kick success in elite football. International journal of performance analysis in sport, 15 (2), 430-451 Cassidy, T.G., Jones, R.L. and Potrac, P., 2015. Understanding sports coaching: The pedagogical, social and cultural foundations of coaching practice. London: Routledge Castellano, J. and Casamchana, D., 2010. Heart rate and motion analysis by GPS in beach soccer. Journal of sports science and medicine, 9, 98-2013 Chambers, D., 1997. Coaching: the art and science. Toronto: Key Porter Books Chang, J., 1979. The biomechanical analysis of the selected soccer throw-in techniques. Asian journal of physical education, 2 (4), p. 254-260 Clemente, F.M., Couceiro, M.S. Martins, F.M.L. and Mendes, R., 2012. The usefulness of small-sided games on soccer training. Journal of physical education and sport, 12 (1), 93-102 Cohen, I., Looije, R. and Neerincx, M.A., 2011. Child’s recognition of emotions in robot’s face and body. Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Human-robot interaction, 11, 123-124


54

Cohen, L., Manion, L. and Morrison, K., 2007. Research methods in education. 6th Edition. Oxon: Routledge. Curneen, G., 2015. The modern soccer coach: position-specific training. Stoke: Bennion Kearney Limited De Baranda, P. and Lopez-Riquelme, D., 2012. Analysis of corner kicks in relation to match status in the 2006 world cup. European journal of sport science, 12 (2), 121-129. de Carnys, G.M.S. and Lees, A., 2008. The effects of strength training and practice on soccer throw-in performance. In: Reilly, T. and Korkusuz, F., eds. Science and soccer VI. London: Routledge. 302-306 Dellal A., Chamari K. Pintus A. Girard O. Cotte T. and Keller D., 2008. Heart rate responses during small-sided and short intermittent running training in elite soccer players: a comparative study. Journal of strength and conditioning research, 22 (5), 1449-1457

Dellal, A., Chamari, K. Wong, D. Ahmaidi, S. Keller, D. Barros, R. Bisciotti, G. and Carling, C., 2011. Comparison of physical and technical performance in European soccer match-play: FA Premier League and La Liga. European journal of sport science, 11 (1), 51-59.

Dellal, A., Drust, B. and Lago-Penas, C., 2012. Variation of activity demands in small-sided soccer games. International journal of sports medicine, 33 (05), 370-375 Dellal, A., Wong, D.P. Moalla, W. and Chamari, K., 2010. Physical and technical activity of soccer players in the French first league – with special reference to their playing position. International sportmed journal, 11 (2), 278-290 Docheff, D., 2010. Theory into practice: Feedback: the key to effective coaching strategies, 23 (6), 34-35. Doucet, C., 2005. Soccer tactics training. Pennsylvania: Reedswain Drewett, J., 2007. How to improve at soccer. St. Catharines: Crabtree Publishing Company Dufour, W., 2003. Computer assisted scouting in soccer. In: Clarys, J., Reilly, T. and Stibbe, A., eds. Science and football II. Oxfordshire: Taylor & Francis. 160 Edward, T., 2003. Soccer skills and tactics. Bath: Parragon. Edwards, A. and Skinner, J., 2009. Qualitative Research in Sport Management. Oxford: Elsevier. Evangelos, B., Eleftherios, M. Aris, S. Loannis, G. Gissis, Aristotelis, G., 2013. Offense and defense statistical indicators that determine the Greek superleague teams placement on the table 2011-12. Physical education and sport, 13 (3), 338-347 Field, A., 2009. Discovering statistics using SPSS. California: SAGE Franks, I. and Miller, G.,1986. Eyewitness testimony in sport. Journal of Sports Behaviour. 9 (1), 38-45.


55

Franks, I., 1993. The effects of experience on the detection and location of performance differences in a gymnastic technique. Research quarterly for exercise and sport, 64 (2), 227-231

Franks, I.M. and Miller, G., 1991. Training coaches to observe and remember. Journal of sports sciences, 9, 285-297 Garganta, J., Maia, J. and Basto, F., 1997. Analysis of goal- scoring patterns in European top level soccer teams. In: Reilly, T., Bangsbo, J., Hughes, M. eds. Science and Football III. London: E. & F. Spon., 246-250

Gatz, G., 2009. Complete conditioning for soccer. Illinois: Human Kinetics

Gaudino, P., Gaudino, C. Alberti, G. and Minetti, A., 2013. Biomechanics and predicted energetics of sprinting on sand: Hints for soccer training. Journal of science and medicine in sport, 16 (3), 271-275 Gómez M.A., Gomez-Lopez, M. Lago, C. and Sampaio, J., 2012. Effects of game location and final outcome on gamerelated statistics in each zone of the pitch in professional football. European journal of sports sciences, 12 (5), 393-398 Grant, A.G., Williams, A.M. and Reilly, T., 1999, Analysis of goals scored in the 1998 World Cup. Journal of Sports Sciences, 17, 826–827. Gratton, C. and Jones, I., 2004. Research methods for sports studies. London: Routledge Gratton, C. and Jones, I., 2010. Research methods for sports studies. 2nd ed. Oxfordshire: Taylor & Francis Hill-Haas S., Couts A. Rowsell G. and Dawson B., 2009a. Generic versus small-sided game training in soccer. International journal of sports medicine, 30 (9), 636-642 Hill-Haas S., Dowson B.T. Couts A.J. Rowsell G.J., 2009b. Physiological responses and time-motion characteristics of various small-sided soccer games in youth players. Journal of sports sciences, 27 (1), 1-8 Hill-Haas S., Dowson B.T. Couts A.J. and Rowsell G.J., 2010. Time-motion characteristics and physiological responses of small-sided games in elite youth players: the influence of player number and rule changes. Journal of strength and conditioning research, 24 (8), 2149-2156 Hughes, C., 1996. Soccer skills: tactics and teamwork. London: Diamond Books. Hughes, M. and Bartlett, R.M., 2002. The use of performance indicators in performance analysis. Journal of sports science, 20, 739-754 Hughes, M. and Franks, I., 2004. Notational analysis of sport. 2nd Edition

Hughes, M., 2008. Notational analysis for coaches. In: Jones, R.L., Hughes, M. and Kingston, K. eds. An introduction to sports coaching from science and theory to practice. 1st ed. Oxon: Routledge, 101-113.


56

Impellizzeri F.M., Marcora S.M. Castagna C. Reilly T. Sassi A. Iaia F.M. and Rampinini E., 2006. Physiological and performance effects of generic versus specific aerobic training in soccer players. International journal of sports medicine, 27, 483-492 Jackson, S.L., 2012. Research methods and statistics: a critical thinking approach. 4th Ed. California: Wadsworth James, N., 2006. Notational analysis in soccer: past, present and future. International journal of performance analysis in sport, 6(2), 67-81. James, N., Mellalieu, S.D. and Hollely, C., 2002. Analysis of strategies in soccer as a function of European and domestic competition. International journal of performance analysis in sport, 2 (1), 85-103 Januario, N.M.S., Rosado, A.F. and Mesquita, I., 2013. Variables affecting athletes’ retention of coaches’ feedback. Perceptual and motor skills, 117, 389-401 Jinshan, X., Xiaoke, C. Yamanaka, K. and Matsumoto, M., 1993. Analysis of goals in the 14 th World Cup. In: Reilly, T., Clarys, J. and Stibbe, A., eds. Science and football II. London: E. & F.N., 203-205 Jones S. and Drust B., 2007. Physiological and Technical Demands of 4v4 and 8v8 games in elite youth soccer players. Kinesiology, 39 (2), 150-156 Jones, I., 2014. Research methods for sports studies. 3rd ed. London: Routledge. Jones, P.D., James, N., Mellalieu, S.D., 2004. Possession as a performance indicator in soccer. International journal of performance analysis in sport, 4 (1), 98-102 Jones, R.L. and Kingston, K., 2013. An introduction to sports coaching: Connecting theory to practice. London: Routledge Kahane, L.H. and Shmanske, S., 2012. The oxford handbook of sports economics: Volume 1: The economics of sports. Oxford: Oxford University Press Katis A. and Kellis E., 2009. Effects of small-sided games on physical conditioning and performance in young soccer players. Journal of sports science medicine, 8, 374.380 Klenke, K., 2015. Qualitative research in the study of leadership. Bradford: Emerald Group Publishing Kuper, S. and Szymanski, S., 2012. Soccernomics. New York: HaperCollins Lago-Ballesteros J, Lago-Peñas C, Rey E. The effect of playing tactics and situational variables on achieving score-box possessions in a professional soccer team. J Sport Sci, 2012; 30(14): 1455-1461 Lago-Peñas, C. and Dellal, A., 2010. Ball possession strategies in elite soccer according to the evolution of the match-ccore: The influence of situational variables. Journal of human kinetics, 25 (3), 93-100


57

Lago-Penas, C. and Martin, R., 2007. Determinants of possession of the ball in soccer. Journal of sports sciences, 25 (9), 969-974 Laird, P. and Waters, L., 2008. Eye-witness recollection of sports coaches. International journal of performance analysis of sport, 8 (1), 76-84 Lanham, N., 2005. The goal complete: The winning difference. In: Reilly, T., Cabri, J. and Araujo, D., eds. Science and football V. London: Routledge, 194-200 Launder, A.G. and Piltz, W., 2013. Play practice: Engaging and developing skilled players from beginner to elite. Illinois: Human Kinetics Liebermann, D. G., Katz, L. Hughes, M. D. Bartlett, R. M. McClements, J. and Franks, I. M., 2002. Advances in the application of information technology to sport performance. Journal of sports sciences, 20 (10), 755-769. Light, R., Quay, J. Harvey, S. and Mooney, A., 2013. Contemporary developments in games teaching. London: Routledge Little T. and Williams A., 2007. Measures of exercise intensity during soccer training drills with professional soccer players. Journal of strength and conditioning research, (21), 367-371 Luhtanen, P., Belinskij, A. Hayrinen, M. and Vanttinen, T., 2001. A comparative tournament analysis between EURO 1996 and 2000 in soccer. International journal of performance analysis in sport, 1 (1), 74-82 Luxbacher, J., 1999. Attacking soccer. Illinois: Human Kinetics Lyle, J., 2002. Sports coaching concepts: a framework for coaches’ behaviour. London: Psychology Press Marczyk, G., DeMatteo, D. and Festinger, D., 2005. Essential of Research Design and Methodology. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Markola, P. and Silk, M., 2011. Qualitative Research for Physical Culture. London: Palgrave MacMillan. Martin, T.J., 2015. Soccer the right technique: How to coach soccer skills. Bangkok: BooksMango Maslovat, D. and Franks, I.M., 2008. The need for feedback. In: Hughes, M. and Franks, I.M. eds. Essentials of performance analysis: An introduction. London: Routledge 1-7. McCarthy, J.P., 2007. Coaching youth soccer: The guide for coaches and parents. Ohio: Writer’s Digest McGarry, T., O’Donoghue, P. Sampaio, J., 2013. Routledge handbook of sports performance analysis. London: Routledge


58

McGinn, T., Wyer, P.C. Newman, T.B. Keitz, S. Leipzig, R. and Guyatt, G., 2004. Tips for teachers of evidence based medicine: 3. Understanding and calculating kappa. Canadian medical association journal, 171 (11), 1-9 McNabb, D.E., 2015. Research methods for political science: quantitative and qualitative methods. London: Routledge Meeker, W.Q. and Escobar, L.A., 2014. Statistical methods for reliability data. New York: John Wiley & Sons Michailidis, Y., Michailidis, C., Primpa, E., 2013. Analysis of goals scored in European championship 2012. Journal of human sport and exercise, 8 (2), 367-376 Moran, A.,2004. Sport and Exercise Psychology. East Sussex: Routledge. Morgan, M. and Summers, J., 2005. Sports Marketing. Victoria: Thomson. Moskowitz, T. and Wertheim, L.J., 2011. Scorecasting: The hidden influences behind how sports are played and games are won. New York: Crown Publishing Group Murray, S., Maylor, D. and Hughes, M., 1997. A preliminary investigation into the provision of computerised analysis feedback to elite squash players. In: Lees, A., ed. Science and racket sports II. London: E. & F.N. Spon., 235-240 Nelson, L., Groom, R. and Potrac, P., 2014. Research methods in sports coaching. London: Routledge Njororai, W.W.S., 2004. Analysis of the goals scored at the 17th world cup soccer tournament in south korea-japan 2002. African journal for physical, health education, recreation and dance, 10 (4), 326-332 O’Donoghue, P. and Holmes, L., 2015. Data analysis in sport. London: Routledge O’Donoghue, P., 2009. Research methods for sports performance analysis. London: Routledge O’Donoghue, P., 2010. Research methods for sports performance analysis. 2nd ed. London:Routledge O’Donoghue., 2013. Statistics for sport and exercise studies. Oxfordshire: Taylor & Francis O’Donoghue, P., 2014. An introduction to performance analysis of sport. London: Routledge Ott, R. and Longnecker, M.,2010, An Introduction to Statistical Methods and Data Analysis. 6th Edition. California: Wadsworth. Owen A., Twist C. and Ford P., 2004. Small-sided games: The physiological and technical effect of altering pitch size and player numbers. Insight, 7, 50-53 Peters, D.M. and O’Donoghue, P., 2013. Performance analysis of sport IX. London: Routledge


59

Picardi, C.A. and Masick, K.D., 2013. Research methods: Designing and conducting research with a real-world focus. California: SAGE Potrac, P., Gilbert, W. and Denison, J., 2013. Routledge handbook of sports coaching. London: Routledge Pulling, C., Robins, M. and Rixon, T., 2013. Defending corner kicks: analysis from the English premier league. International journal of performance analysis, 13 (1), 135-148 Raiola, G., Parisi, F., Giugno, Y. and Di Tore, P., 2013. Video analysis applied to volleyball didactics to improve sport skills. Journal of human sport and exercise, 8 (2), 307-313. Rampinini E. Impellizzeri FM. Castagna C. Abt G. Chamari K. Sassi A. Marcora SM. Factors influencing physiological responses to small-sided soccer games. J Sports Sci, 2007. 25(6), 659-666. Reep, C. & Benjamin, B., 1968. Skill and chance in association football. Journal of the royal statistical society, A (131), 581 – 585. Reilly T, Gilbourne D. Science and football: A review of applied research in the football codes. J Sport Sci, 2003; 21: 693-705 Reilly, T. and Williams, A.M., 2003. Science and soccer. London: Psychology Press Robinson, P.E., 2014. Foundations of sports coaching. 2nd ed. London: Routledge Rosado, A., Mesquita, I. Breia, E. and Januario, N., 2008. Athlete’s retention of coach’s instruction on task presentation and feedback. International journal of performance analysis in sport, 8 (1), 19-30 Rubin, A. and Babbie, E.,2010. Essential Research Methods for Social Work. California: Wadsworth. Ruiz-Ruiz, C., Fradua, L., Fernandez-Garcia, A., Zubilaga., 2013. Analysis of entries into the penalty area as a performance indicator in soccer. European journal of sport science, 13 (3), 241-248 Scarfone, R., Tessitore, A. Minganti, C. Ferragina, A. Capranica, L., and Ammendolia, A., 2009. Match demands of beach soccer: a case study. Book of abstracts of the 14th Annual Congress of the European College of Sport Science, 54 Schinke, R. and Hanrahan., 2009. Cultural sport psychology. Illinois: Human Kinetics Schultz, B., 2015. Lombardi dies, orr flies, marshall cries: The sports legacy of 1970. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Schwarz, E. and Hunter, J., 2008. Advanced Theory and Practice in Sports Marketing. Oxford: Elsevier.


60

Serra-Olivares, J., Gonzalez-Villora, S. and Garcia-Lopez, L.M., 2015. Effects of modifications of task constraints in 3-versus-3 small-sided-soccer-games. South African journal for research in sport, physical education and recreation, 37 (2), 119-129

Shafizadeh, M., Taylor, M. and Peñas, C., 2013. Performance consistency of international soccer teams in Euro 2012: A time series analysis. Journal of human kinetics, 38. Skinner, J., Edwards, A. and Corbett, B., 2014. Research methods for sports management. London: Routledge Skubula, M. and Burkett, S., 2015. Developing the modern footballer through futsal. Okamoor: Bennion Kearny Limited Smith, M.F., 2010. Research methods in sport. California: SAGE Sousa, T. and Gargantua, J., 2001. The importance of set-plays in soccer. In: Hughes, M.D. and Travares, F., eds. Science and soccer VI. London: Routledge. 302-306 Sparks, A.,2009. Research in Physical Education and Sport, Exploring Alternative Visions. Oxon: Routledge. Suzuki, K. and Nishijima, T., 2004. Validity of a soccer defending skill scale (SDSS) using game performances. International journal of sport and health sciences, 2, 34-49 Swinnen, B., 2016. Strength training for soccer. London: Routledge Taylor, J.B., James, N. and Mellalieu, S.D., 2005. Notational analysis of corner kicks inEnglish premier league. In: Reilly, T., Cabri, J. and Araujo, D., eds. Science and football V. London: Routledge, 229-238 Taylor, J.B., Mellalieu, S.D., James, N. and Shearer, D., 2008. The influence of match location, quality of possession and match status on technical performance in professional association football. Journal of sports sciences, 26 (9), 885-895 Tenebaum, G. and Driscoll, M.P., 2005. Methods of research in sports studies: quantitative and qualitative approaches. Aachen: Meyer & Meyer Verlag Tenga, A., Holme, I. Ronglan, R.T. and Bahr, R., 2010. Effect of playing tactics on achieving score-box possessions in a random series of team possessions from Norwegian professional soccer matches. Journal of sports sciences, 28 (3), 245-255 Tucker, W., Mellalieu, James, N. and Taylor, J.,2005. Game location effects in professional soccer: A case study. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport. 5 (2), 23-35. Vermeulen, H., 2004. Zone soccer: a game of time and space. Pennsylvania: Reedswain Vogelbien, M., Nopp, S., Hokelmann, A., 2014. Defensive transition in soccer – are prompt possession regains a measure of success? A quantitative analysis of German football – Bundesliga 2010/11. Journal of sports sciences, 32 (11), 1076-1083


61

Welsh, A., 1999. The soccer goalkeeping handbook: The essential guide for players and coaches. Indianapolis: Masters Press. Witzig, R., 2006. The global art of soccer. New Orleans: CusiBoy Publishing

Wright, B. and O'Halloran, P., 2013. Perceived success, auditory feedback, and mental imagery: What best predicts improved efficacy and motor performance? Research quarterly for exercise and sport, 84 (2), 139-146.

Wright, C., Atkins, S. Jones, B. and Todd, J., 2013. The role of performance analysts within the coaching process: Performance analysts survey 'the role of performance analysts in elite football club settings.'. International journal of performance analysis in sport, 13 (1), 240-261.

Wright, C., Atkins, S. Jones, B. Todd, J., 2013. The role of performance analysts within the coaching process: Performance analysts survey ‘the role of performance analysts in elite football club settings. International journal of performance analysis in sport, 13 (1), 240-261 Wulf, G., McDonnell, N. Gartner, M. and Schwarz, A., 2002. Enhancing the learning of sports skills through external-focus feedback. Journal of motor behaviour, 34 (2), 171-182 Wymer, P., 2004. Coaching soccer tactics. Phil Wymer Yin, R.K., 2009. Case study research: design and methods. California: SAGE

Robert Steadman-Trenear Appendices

62

8.0 Appendices 8.1 Appendix A – Physiological benefits of SSGs in association football

Generally, studies demonstrate SSGs eliciting greater heart rates amongst participants than

larger formats at al. 2004; Impellizzeri et al. 2006; Little and Williams 2007; Hill-Haas et al.

2009b). However, other authors argue this is a possible oversimplification as they have found

different SSG formats produce varied heart rate and lactate values (Aroso et al. 2004; Dellal

et al. 2008; Jones and Drust 2007).

Reviewing these studies, Aguiar et al. (2012) attribute this debate to the lack of consistency of

regulating factors in SSG design, ability, playing rules and coach encouragement amongst the

research. They conclude that SSGs are an effectual tool for aerobic and anaerobic training but

the adaptable nature of SSGs and the lack of research in one particular SSG type makes

physiological analysis difficult. Nonetheless these studies agree that these factors have no

significant influence on the increased technical demands (Aguiar et al. 2012).


63

8.2 Appendix B – Ethics checklist

Researcher Details

Project Details

Reference Id 10152

Status Approved

Date Approved 11/01/2016

Name Robert Steadman-Trenear

School School of Tourism

Status Undergraduate (BA, BSc)

Course BSc Sport Development & Coaching Sciences

Have you received external funding to support thisresearch project?

No

TitleAn investigation into whether defensive key performance indicators from 11-a-side soccer applyto beach soccer

Proposed Start Date 04/01/2016

Proposed End Date 14/04/2016

Supervisor Andrew Callaway

Summary - no more than 500 words (including detail on background methodology, sample, outcomes, etc.)

Methodology - using dartfish tagging panel to code defensive actions from a large sample of beach soccer games (EBSL,Beach soccer world cup etc). Data will be then compared to literature from 11-a-side soccer, ultimately determiningwhether any key defensive principles crossover between the two forms of the game.

Page 1 of 2 Printed On 22/04/2016 17:10:48


64

8.3 Appendix C – Operational rules

999

• Record 999 if the variable can not be recognized • Record 999 if the variable is out of camera view


65

8.4 Appendix D – Flowchart definitions Table 32: Possession regain variable defintions

Variable Definition (author) Possession regain attempt Open Set-play Ground Interception Aerial Interception Regained possession Foul conceded

An attempt either by tackle or interception to take possession of the ball from the attacker (Luhtanen et al. 2001). Attempt made during open game-play (Carrington 2003). Attempt made following a corner or throw in (Carrington 2003). When the ball has touched 3 opposition players the throw-in/corner phase ends and thus becomes open game-play. When the defender attempts to prevent a ball passed by an opponent (below waist) reaching its intended receiver by contacting the ball and keeping his own team in possession of the ball (Barreira et al. 2014; Almeida et al. 2014). When the defender attempts to prevent a ball passed by an opponent (above waist) reaching its intended receiver by contacting the ball and keeping his own team in possession of the ball (Barreira et al. 2014; Almeida et al. 2014). When the defender takes control of the ball following a tackle or interception. A positive action must follow to constitute regaining possession. For example, a pass; dribble; cross; shot (Barreira et al. 2014; Almeida et al. 2014) When the referee or officials deem the defender’s efforts illegal (Wymer 2004)


66

Attempt failed Set play conceded Shot conceded Goal scored?

When the defender’s tackle misses the ball and does not concede a foul. When the defender’s interception attempt misses the ball (Wymer 2004) When the defender’s tackle or interception results in an opposition corner or throw-in (Welsh 1999) The attacker has a shot on goal as the consequence of a failed tackle or interception of the defender (Luxbacher 1999) When the referee or officials award a goal as the consequence of the sht from a failed tackle or interception (Luxbacher 1999)


67

Table 33: Defending corner and throw-in definitions

Variable Definition (author) Defending corner or throw-in Ground corner Aerial corner Inswing technique Outswing technique Short technique Straight/Driven technique Chipped technique Man marking defensive strategy

When the attackers are taking a corner to throw-in (Welsh 1999) When the corner path is below waist height (Casal et al. 2015) When the corner path is above waist height (Casal et al. 2015) A corner with a curved trajectory towards the defending goal. Performed with the instep (Taylor et al. 2005) A corner with a curved trajectory away from the defending goal. Performed with the instep (Taylor et al. 2005) A corner that is passed to a teammate over a small distance. Performed with the side-foot (Taylor et al. 2005) A corner with a straight trajectory. Performed with the instep. (Taylor et al. 2005) A corner with a high trajectory. Performed by getting the toe under the ball with little follow through (Taylor et al. 2005; Carr and Ferdinand 2006) When defenders follow the runs of attackers during corners (Pulling et al. 2013)


68

Zonal defensive strategy Run-in technique Opposition keep possession Foul conceded Goalkeeper intercepts No outcome Shot conceded Goal scored?

When the defenders do not follow the runs of attackers during corners (Pulling et al. 2013) When the opponent taking the throw-in moves towards the by-line and throws (Chang 1979) When the attacking teams choose to preserve possession from the corner or throw-in (Luxbacher 1999) When the ball has touched 3 opposition players When the referee or officials deem a defensive action illegal whilst the ball is in flight during a corner or throw-in (Wymer 2004) When the goalkeeper catches or collects the ball with no other player touching it (Welsh 1999) When the corner or throw-in results in another set play without the ball touching any player (Luxbacher 1999) When the attacking team shoot during the throw-in or corner phase (Luxbacher 1999) When the referee or officials award a goal as a consequence of the shot during the throw-in or corner phase (Luxbacher 1999)


69

Table 34: Clearance variable definitions Variable Definition (author) Clearance Set play conceded Clearance lands inside the penalty area Clearance lands outside the penalty area Shot conceded Goal scored?

When the defender heads or kicks the ball away from opposition and teammates following a corner or throw-in (Pulling et al. 2013) When the defender’s clearance results in a corner or throw-in (Pulling et al. 2013) When the defender’s clearance comes into contact with the surface, or another player inside the goalkeeper’s penalty area (Pulling et al. 2013) When the defender’s clearance comes into contact with the surface, out of play or another player outside the penalty area (Pulling et al. 2013) When the defender’s clearance lands to an opposition player and they shoot (Luxbacher 1999) When the referee or officials award a goal as a consequence of the shot made from the opposition player where the ball landed from the clearance (Luxbacher 1999)


70

Table 35: Duel variable definitions Variable Definition (author) Duel Aerial duel Ground duel Duel won Foul conceded Duel lost Set play conceded Shot conceded Goal scored?

When the ball is not in possession of either team and two opponents attempt to gain possession (Dellal et al. 2012). The defending player during the duel is on the team who did not touch the ball last. When the duel occurs above waist height (Dellal et al. 2012) When the duel occurs below waist height (Dellal et al. 2012) When the defender has control of the ball following the duel. A positive action must follow to constitute a duel won. For example, a pass; dribble; cross; shot (Dellal et al. 2012) When the referee or officials award a free-kick against the defender during a duel (Wymer 2004) When the defender fails to control the ball during a duel. A positive action must follow from the opponent to constitute a duel lost. For example, a pass; dribble; cross; shot (Dellal et al. 2012) When the defender’s duel attempt results in a throw-in or corner (Welsh 1999) The attacker has a shot at goal as a result of winning a duel (Luxbacher 1999) When the referee or officials award a goal as a consequence of the shot made from the opposition player who won the duel (Luxbacher 1999)


71

8.5 Appendix E – Tagging panel created in Dartfish for data collection

Figure 6: Screenshot of possession regain tagging panel


72

Figure 7: Screenshot of defending corner or throw-in tagging panel 1


73



74



75

Figure 10: Screenshot of duel tagging panel

dissertation 2016

Documents