Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Extremadura, Cáceres, Spain.
Sport Studies Center, Rey Juan Carlos University, Alcorcón, Madrid, Spain.
PLoS One. 2018 Jan 10;13(1):e0190157. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190157. eCollection 2018.
To optimize players' tactical abilities, coaches need to design training sessions with representative learning tasks, such as, small-sided games. Moreover, it is necessary to adapt the complexity of the tasks to the skill level of the athletes to maximally improve their perceptual, visual and attentive abilities. The objective of this study was to analyze the effect of two teaching programs, each utilizing modified games with varied levels of opposition, on decision-making and action execution in young players with different levels of sports expertise. 19 football players (U12), separated into two ability groups (Average versus Low skill-level), participated in a series of training sessions that were spread over 4 phases: Pre-intervention 1, Intervention 1 (teaching program based on modified games with numerical superiority in attack), Pre-intervention 2 and Intervention 2 (teaching program based on modified games with numerical equality). Each intervention phase lasted 14 sessions. Decision-making and the execution of pass action during league matches over the same period were evaluated using the Game Performance Evaluation Tool (GPET). The Average skill-level group showed significant differences after the first intervention in decision-making and execution of the pass action (decision-making, p = .015; execution, p = .031), but not after the second intervention (decision-making, p = 1.000; execution, p = 1.000). For the Low skill-level group, significant differences were only observed in the execution of passing between the first and last phases (p = .014). These findings seem to indicate that for groups with an average level of expertise, training with numerical superiority in attack provides players with more time to make better decisions and to better execute actions. However, for lower-level groups programs may take longer to facilitate improvement. Nevertheless, numerical equality did not result in improvement for either group.
为了优化运动员的战术能力,教练需要设计具有代表性学习任务的训练课程,例如小场比赛。此外,有必要根据运动员的技能水平调整任务的复杂性,以最大限度地提高他们的感知、视觉和注意力能力。本研究的目的是分析两个教学计划对不同运动专长水平的年轻运动员决策和行动执行的影响。19 名足球运动员(U12)分为两个能力组(平均技能水平与低技能水平),参加了一系列跨越 4 个阶段的训练课程:干预前 1 期、干预 1 期(基于具有进攻人数优势的修改游戏的教学计划)、干预前 2 期和干预 2 期(基于具有人数均等的修改游戏的教学计划)。每个干预阶段持续 14 节课。在同一时期,使用比赛表现评估工具(GPET)评估联赛比赛中的决策和传球动作执行情况。平均技能水平组在第一次干预后,在决策和传球动作的执行方面表现出显著差异(决策,p=0.015;执行,p=0.031),但在第二次干预后没有差异(决策,p=1.000;执行,p=1.000)。对于低技能水平组,仅在第一次和最后一次阶段观察到传球执行方面的显著差异(p=0.014)。这些发现似乎表明,对于具有平均专长水平的小组,具有进攻人数优势的训练为球员提供了更多时间做出更好的决策并更好地执行动作。然而,对于较低水平的小组,可能需要更长的时间来促进提高。然而,对于两个小组来说,人数均等并没有导致提高。