Lecture 1 - Introduction (3)

Notational Analysisof Sport

Mike Hughes

A lecture course for Level 1 or Level 2

of a degree in Sport Science

This material is presented in a distance learning and self development format. At certain stages, tutorials with an experienced member of staff will be a big help.

The reference text for the course is:-

Hughes, M. & Franks, I.M. (1997). Notational Analysis of Sport. London: E. & F.N. Spon.

The presentations are strongly based on the material in this book. The book should only be a starting point for your search for further material. The reference lists in the book will lead you to the most relevant research for the sports of your interest.


Introduction

This lecture course in Notational Analysis is aimed to explain, in varying stages:-


What is it?

Why do we use it?

Who has done research in it?

How can we design a system?

Where is the technology taking us?

Definition

Notational Analysis is an objective way of recording performance so that key elements of that performance can be quantified in a valid and consistent manner.



Why?

•Coaching Science

•Sports Science

Notation Systems

Let us examine now the fundamental elements in the design of a system.

We will examine these in more detail later

Fundamental Elements in Notation

Position

Divide playing area into cells

Give each area a code

It is always a compromise between accuracy and significance


PositionPlayer

•Give each player a code

•Usually their shirt number,

•if they have one


PositionPlayerAction

What do you want to find out about your sport

Look at the logic of the game

Decide on the actions…..

…and outcomes

Give them simple codes


PositionPlayerActionTime

Time code makes the analysis more complex

Depending upon the sport, can be difficult to do in-event


How? -

An objective recording of:

position

player

action

time


Who?Early researchers in notation:

Messerschmit & Bucher (1939)

Reep and Benjamin (1968) Downey (1973) Reilly (1976) Sanderson and Way (1977)

We will review the work of the key workers in this field


We will examine where the technology is taking this area of sports science

Hand Notation

We will be using both…...

Hand Notation

•It requires simple equipment

•It is cheap

•It can be very accurate

•It can be very time consuming processing the data

0100020003000400050006000700080009000

Frequency

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >8

Touches/ Possession

19901994

Computerised Notation

We will also be experiencing…….

Computerised Notation

Can be difficult and time-consuming to enter the dataData output immediateIntegration with graphics systems makes output clearerMoving towards integration with video-editing suites

Hand vs. Computer

Same process but implement different technologies

distinct advantages and disadvantages

Purposes ofNotational Analysis

Movement analysis

Tactical analysis

Technical analysis

Database gathering

Modelling


Movement analysis

distances moved, velocities, accelerations, work rate

We measure:


Tactical analysis

- patterns of play can define success or lack of it


Technical analysis

- consistent errors, or success can point to either technical flaws or technical strengths


Modelling

- having sufficient data enables models of performance to be defined


Database

- creation of databases enables prediction

The Coaching Process

Intervention to instigate observable change in behaviour

Analysis in the Analysis in the Coaching ProcessCoaching Process(Franks et al, 1983)

Athlete

Performs

Coach

Observes

Past results

accounted for

Coach Plans

practice

Coach conducts

practice

Performance

Analysed


Intervention to instigate observable change in behaviour

•Objective performance measures serve as basis for future planning

The Need for Feedback

Franks and Goodman (1983)

found that NGB coaches in Canada remembered correctly 30% of performance…..

HENCE …….It is vital to the coaching process that feedback is accurate

The bad news is that:-

…..and


Hughes, C. (1981)

Soccer coaches in England remembered correctly 20% of performance


found that International level soccer coaches recalled only 42% of key factors that determined successful performance

…..Worse still...

Franks and Miller (1986)

….further

The Need forObjective Information

Franks (1993)

Experienced gymnastic coaches

not sig. better in detection of differences

more false positives confidence in decisions

when wrong

Observation of performance can suffer from:

Memory Overload Subjective Bias Halo Effect Leniency Error Highlighting


Memory Overload

too many bits of information


Subjective Bias

despite efforts at objectivity coaches decisions will be effected


Halo Effect

performances will be rated higher, or lower, if the performer starts well……….

……..or badly


Leniency Error

coaches will over-rate a very poor performance…...

……. and vice versa


Highlighting

coaches will remember key elements of performance but not the ‘bread and butter’


S p or t S c ie n tist

C o a ch

A th le te

The sports scientist enables the coach to enhance the performance of the

athlete and/or team

Summary


Why?

coaching science

sport science


How?

position

player

action

time


Who?Early researchers:

Messerschmidt and Bucher (1939)

Downey (1973)

Reilly (1976)

Sanderson (1983)


Where?

We will discuss later the latest developments in hardware and software that will shape notation in the future


Mike Hughes

Sport Science - Level 1 or Level 2

Lecture 1 - Introduction (3)

Documents