Ju Wonwoo, Hawkins Richard, Doran Dominic, Gómez-Díaz Antonio, Martín-García Andrés, Evans Mark, Laws Andy, Bradley And Paul S
The Research Institution for Sport and Exercise Sciences at Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, England, UK.
Football Medicine and Science Department at Manchester United Football Club, Manchester, UK.
Biol Sport. 2023 Apr;40(2):561-573. doi: 10.5114/biolsport.2023.118020. Epub 2022 Jul 21.
The present study aimed to determine the physical-tactical profiles of elite football teams and individual players according to final league rankings. A total of 50 English Premier League matches (n = 100 match and 583 player observations) were analysed by coding the player's physical-tactical actions through synchronising tracking data and video. Final league rankings were categorised into Tiers: (A) 1-5 ranking (n = 25), (B) 6-10 ranking (n = 26), (C) 11-15 ranking (n = 26), and (D) 16-20 ranking (n = 23). One-way analyses of variance were used to compare match performances between different Tiers, and effect size (ES) was determined for the meaningfulness of the difference. Tier A teams covered 39-51% more high-intensity distance for 'Move to Receive/Exploit Space' (ES: 1.3-1.6, P < 0.01) and 'Run with Ball' (ES: 0.9-1.0, P < 0.05) than Tier C and D, and 23-94% more distance for 'Over/Underlap' (ES: 1.0, P < 0.01), 'Run in Behind/Penetrate' (ES: 0.7, P < 0.05), and 'Break into Box' (ES: 0.9, P < 0.05) compared to Tier C. Central and Wide Defensive Players in Tier A covered 65-551% more high-intensity 'Move to Receive/Exploit Space' distance compared to other Tiers (ES: 0.6-1.0, P < 0.01). Moreover, the additional options within the physical-tactical actions and zonal differences unveiled more meaningful insights into 'HOW' the top Tier teams physically and tactically perform. Thus, the amalgamated physical-tactical data help improve our understanding of a team's playing style relative to their competitive standard.
本研究旨在根据联赛最终排名确定精英足球队和球员的身体战术概况。通过同步跟踪数据和视频对球员的身体战术动作进行编码,分析了总共50场英超比赛(n = 100场比赛,583名球员观察数据)。联赛最终排名分为几个等级:(A)排名1 - 5(n = 25),(B)排名6 - 10(n = 26),(C)排名11 - 15(n = 26),以及(D)排名16 - 20(n = 23)。采用单因素方差分析来比较不同等级之间的比赛表现,并确定效应量(ES)以评估差异的显著性。A组球队在“移动接球/利用空间”(ES:1.3 - 1.6,P < 0.01)和“带球奔跑”(ES:0.9 - 1.0,P < 0.05)方面的高强度跑动距离比C组和D组多39 - 51%,在“重叠/交叉跑位”(ES:1.0,P < 0.01)、“身后跑/渗透”(ES:0.7,P < 0.05)和“冲入禁区”(ES:0.9,P < 0.05)方面的距离比C组多23 - 94%。与其他等级相比,A组的中后卫和边后卫在“移动接球/利用空间”方面的高强度跑动距离多65 - 551%(ES:0.6 - 1.0,P < 0.01)。此外,身体战术动作中的额外选项和区域差异为顶级球队在身体和战术上的“如何”表现提供了更有意义的见解。因此,综合的身体战术数据有助于提高我们对球队相对于其竞争标准的比赛风格的理解。