EFFECT OF TEAM LEVEL ON SKILL PERFORMANCE IN VOLLEYBALL PDF

Preview

Summary

Palao, J. M., Santos, J. A., & Ureña, A. (2004). Effect of team level on skill performance in volleyball. International Journal of Performance Analysis of Sport, 4(2), 50-60. EFFECT OF TEAM LEVEL ON SKILL PERFORMANCE IN VOLLEYBALL Palao, J.M. 1; Santos, J.A. 2 y Ureña, A. 2 1 Health, Physical Ac...

Description

Accelerat ing t he world's research.

EFFECT OF TEAM LEVEL ON SKILL PERFORMANCE IN VOLLEYBALL Mahmoud husien Aid Ya'qoub

Cite this paper

Downloaded from Academia.edu 

Get the citation in MLA, APA, or Chicago styles

Related papers

Download a PDF Pack of t he best relat ed papers 

Modelação da performance no jogo de voleibol Rui Marcelino

Game-Relat ed Volleyball Skills t hat Influence Vict ory Daniel Lacerda Associat ions bet ween performance indicat ors and set 's result on male volleyball Rui Marcelino

Palao, J. M., Santos, J. A., & Ureña, A. (2004). Effect of team level on skill performance in volleyball. International Journal of Performance Analysis of Sport, 4(2), 50-60.

EFFECT OF TEAM LEVEL ON SKILL PERFORMANCE IN VOLLEYBALL Palao, J.M. 1; Santos, J.A. 2 y Ureña, A. 2 1

Health, Physical Activity and Sport Faculty. Catholic University San Antonio of Murcia (Spain) 2

Physical Activity and Sport Faculty. Granada University (Spain)

Abstract: The present paper studies the effect of a team's level on the performance of skills (serve, reception, spike, block and dig) in high level volleyball. Thirty-three male matches and 23 female matches of the Olympic Games of Sydney 2000 were recorded and analyzed. The performance of skills was evaluated in relation to the success and options that these skills give to one's team and to the opposite team. The team's level was established in relation to the final classification of the team in the competition (level 1: 1st - 4th; level 2: 5th - 8th; & level 3: 9th - 12th). Ten observers participated in the study. Inter- and intra-observer reliability coefficients of the studied variables were calculated (r > 0.92) after training and during the analysis. In males, the results show a significant difference between teams' levels for the skills of spiking and blocking. The block is the skill that differentiates the teams of level 1 with the teams of level 2. A reduction of error in relation to the level of the team is observed. In females, we found a significant difference in the performance of the spike in the teams of level 1. An increase in success of reception, spike, block and dig in relation to the level of the team is observed. Key words: volleyball, performance, skills.

EFFECT OF TEAM LEVEL ON PERFORMANCE OF SKILLS IN VOLLEYBALL Palao, J.M. 1; Santos, J.A. 2 y Ureña, A. 2 1

Health, Physical Activity and Sport Faculty. Catholic University San Antonio of Murcia (Spain) 2

Physical Activity and Sport Faculty. Granada University (Spain)

REVIEW OF LITERATURE Volleyball is differentiated from the rest of team sports, because although it is a sport with discrete skills (Poulton, 1957), the game has a cyclical and sequential pattern (Beal, 1989). It is possible to find a sequence of the actions in the game (graph 1).

KI

K II

RECEPTION

SERVE

SET

SPIKE

BLOCK COVERAGE

K III

DIG

SET

COVERAGE or DIG

SPIKE BLOCK

SET

SPIKE

Graph 1. Structure or game phases of volleyball (Palao, Santos & Ureña, 2002)

In peak performance, the team must have control of the skills to avoid breaking up the sequence while trying to get their opponents to do it. But are there skills that are more important than others? Are there skills that affect a team’s performance more? If we do a review about the importance of the different skills in volleyball, it is possible to find a lot of authors that defend the important of each skill. In table 1, we present some of the studies done on the importance of the different skills on the result.

Table 1. Review of studies about relationship between skills and result in volleyball. Author/s Cox (1973) Coleman (1975) Ferrer (1981)

Gender (Level)

Matches

Males (US College)

107 sets

Males (World Championship 1974) Females (US College)

15 matches 15 sets

Results Spike most influential skill to predict team success Serve reception and block are most highly correlated to tournament finish Errors statistically related to losing Block and spike were the most important in determining team success Relationship between pass-to-set, set-tospike, pass-to-spike.

Males (World Cup 1987)

36 matches

Females (World Championship Classification 1989)

39 matches

Spike and block significantly related to winning

Fellingham et al. (1994)

Males (Olympic Games 1988)

12 matches

Possible to calculate probability of winning and losing from side-out and score phase success percentage

Diaz (1996)

Males (Olympic Games 1992)

44 matches

Set and spike determinants to success

Males (World Cup 1995)

11 matches

Eom (1989)

Santos (1992)

McCughton (1998) Marelic et al. (1998) Moutinho (2001)

Males (Yugoslavian Championship) Males (World League & European Championship)

149 sets 29 matches

Relation between spike-kill and side-out and between block-kill and pointscoring Spike and errors are elements that most influence score Spike and side-out are indicators of victory

Most of these studies have considered the differences between winning or losing a game, but, except for Diaz (1996), they do not consider the classification of teams in the competitions. The fact of not differentiating team levels can provoke that some aspects of the game compensate between them. Also, knowing the differences between levels can let the coach clearly establish their objectives to try to achieve the next level. The purpose of this paper was to study the relationship between team's level and skill performance (serve, reception, spike, block and dig) in high level volleyball and to establish references for coaches to design and control practices and competitions.

METHOD A total of 4968 sequences from 33 male matches and 2450 sequences from 23 female matches of the 2000 Olympics Games in Sydney was analyzed in this descriptive preexperimental study. The observation instrument was a category system (Anguera, 2003). The variables registered were serve performance, reception performance, spike performance, block performance and dig performance, team level and gender.

Team level was established in relation to the final classification of the team in the competition: level 1, classified between 1st - 4th; level 2, classified between 5th - 8th; and level 3, classified between 9th - 12th. Skill performance was evaluated in relation to the success and options that the actions gave to our team and the opponent's team. We utilized the statistic system of the Fédération Internationale de Volleyball (FIVB)1. We differentiated two types of actions to categorize the performance: A) Terminal actions (serve, spike and block). We distinguished five levels to categorize the performance (table 2): 1) Error (0). Failed action or action that did not allow the option to continue (point for the opponent). 2) Maximum opponent attack options or No attack options (1). Action was easily passed or defended and allowed the opponent to attack or counter-attack in the case that the opponent team got ball possession (Maximum opponent attack options); or, ball was defended but could not be attacked, they simply passed the ball, in the case that the analyzed team got the ball (No attack options). 3) Opponent limited attack options or team limited attack options (2). Action was passed or defended and opponent counter-attacked with some attack options, in the case that the opponent team got ball possession (Opponent attack options); or, action was passed or defended and the team counter-attacked with some attack options, in the case that the analyzed team got the ball (team attack options). 4) No opponent attack options or Maximum team attack options (3). Action was passed or defended but opponent could not attack, they simply passed the ball, in the case that the opponent team got ball possession (No opponent attack options); or, action was passed or defended and the team counter-attacked with all attack options, in the case that the analyzed team got the ball (Maximum team attack options). 5) Point (4). Action was a success.

1

Statistic system designed by the International Coach Commission of the Fédération Internationale de Volleyball in 1979 (Díaz, 1992; 1996) adapted from Shall’s Statistic System (Coleman, 1975).

Table 2. Level of performance for terminal actions

Error or point for the opponent

0 1

Opponent team possession Maximum attack options

Analyzed team possession No attack options

2

Limited attack options

Limited attack options

3

No attack options

Maximum attack options

4

Point

B) Continuity actions (pass and dig). We distinguished four levels to categorize the performance: error (0), no attack options (1), limited attack options (2) and maximum team attack options (3).

Table 3. Level of performance for continuous actions

0 1

Error or point for the opponent No attack options

2

Limited attack options

3

Maximum attack options

With the categories of action performance, a performance coefficient is calculated (sum of attempts by category multiplied by value of the category and divided by total attempts). The observation was done by 10 observers trained during 12 sessions of 2 hours each following the criteria established by Anguera (1991, 1993), Behar (1993) and Anguera, Blanco, Losada and Hernández (2000). After training and during the analysis, the interobservers and intra-observers reliability percentages of the studied variables were calculated. All observers had an inter-observer reliability over 92 % and intra-observer reliability over 98%.

A descriptive and inferential analysis of the data was done using the software SPSS 11.0 (Chi-Square Test and likelihood ratio) with a level of statistic significance of p...