A Systematic Review of Collective Tactical Behaviours in Football Using Positional Data.
Journal
Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.)
ISSN: 1179-2035
Titre abrégé: Sports Med
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 8412297
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2020
Feb 2020
Historique:
pubmed:
2
10
2019
medline:
31
7
2020
entrez:
2
10
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Performance analysis research in association football has recently cusped a paradigmatic shift in the way tactical behaviours are studied. Based on insights from system complexity research, a growing number of studies now analyse tactical behaviours in football based on the collective movements of team players. The aim of this systematic review is to provide a summary of empirical research on collective tactical behaviours in football, with a particular focus on organising the methods used and their key findings. A systematic search of relevant English-language articles was performed on one database (Web of Science Core Collection) and one search engine (PubMed), based on PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. The keywords 'football' and 'soccer' were each paired with all possible combinations of the following keywords: 'collective movement behaviour', 'collective behaviour', 'tactical behaviour', 'interpersonal coordination', 'space', 'Voronoi', 'synchronisation', 'tactical analysis', 'constraints', 'ecological dynamics', and 'dynamic positioning'. Empirical studies that were related to tactical analyses of footballers' positional data were sought for inclusion and analysis. Full-text articles of 77 studies were reviewed. A total of 27 tactical variables were identified, which were subsequently organised into 6 categories. In addition to conventional methods of linear analysis, 11 methods of nonlinear analysis were also used, which can be organised into measures of predictability (4 methods) and synchronisation (7 methods). The key findings of the reviewed studies were organised into two themes: levels of analysis, and levels of expertise. Some trends in key findings revealed the following collective behaviours as possible indicators of better tactical expertise: higher movement regularity; wider dispersion in youth players and shorter readjustment delay between teammates and opponents. Characteristic behaviours were also observed as an effect of playing position, numerical inequality, and task constraints. Future research should focus on contextualising positional data, incorporating the needs of coaching staff, to better bridge the research-practice gap.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Performance analysis research in association football has recently cusped a paradigmatic shift in the way tactical behaviours are studied. Based on insights from system complexity research, a growing number of studies now analyse tactical behaviours in football based on the collective movements of team players.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this systematic review is to provide a summary of empirical research on collective tactical behaviours in football, with a particular focus on organising the methods used and their key findings.
METHODS
METHODS
A systematic search of relevant English-language articles was performed on one database (Web of Science Core Collection) and one search engine (PubMed), based on PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. The keywords 'football' and 'soccer' were each paired with all possible combinations of the following keywords: 'collective movement behaviour', 'collective behaviour', 'tactical behaviour', 'interpersonal coordination', 'space', 'Voronoi', 'synchronisation', 'tactical analysis', 'constraints', 'ecological dynamics', and 'dynamic positioning'. Empirical studies that were related to tactical analyses of footballers' positional data were sought for inclusion and analysis.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Full-text articles of 77 studies were reviewed. A total of 27 tactical variables were identified, which were subsequently organised into 6 categories. In addition to conventional methods of linear analysis, 11 methods of nonlinear analysis were also used, which can be organised into measures of predictability (4 methods) and synchronisation (7 methods). The key findings of the reviewed studies were organised into two themes: levels of analysis, and levels of expertise.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Some trends in key findings revealed the following collective behaviours as possible indicators of better tactical expertise: higher movement regularity; wider dispersion in youth players and shorter readjustment delay between teammates and opponents. Characteristic behaviours were also observed as an effect of playing position, numerical inequality, and task constraints. Future research should focus on contextualising positional data, incorporating the needs of coaching staff, to better bridge the research-practice gap.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31571155
doi: 10.1007/s40279-019-01194-7
pii: 10.1007/s40279-019-01194-7
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
343-385Références
Biol Sport. 2018 Jun;35(2):145-153
pubmed: 30455542
J Mot Behav. 1987 Mar;19(1):115-29
pubmed: 23944916
J Sports Sci. 1997 Apr;15(2):137-49
pubmed: 9258844
Sports Med. 2008;38(10):839-62
pubmed: 18803436
Sports Biomech. 2012 Mar;11(1):85-96
pubmed: 22518947
Percept Mot Skills. 2017 Jun;124(3):601-620
pubmed: 28514921
J Hum Kinet. 2013 Mar 28;36:179-89
pubmed: 23717367
J Sports Sci. 2014;32(2):191-9
pubmed: 24016056
Ann Biomed Eng. 2013 Feb;41(2):349-65
pubmed: 23064819
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2010 Dec;5(4):565-9
pubmed: 21266740
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
J Sports Sci. 2018 Jul;36(14):1557-1563
pubmed: 29125029
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000100
pubmed: 19621070
Sports Med. 2008;38(12):1025-43
pubmed: 19026019
J Sports Sci. 2012;30(12):1207-13
pubmed: 22788797
J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2016 Dec;56(12):1554-1561
pubmed: 26765497
J Sports Sci Med. 2011 Mar 01;10(1):233-4
pubmed: 24137056
Front Psychol. 2016 Oct 05;7:1513
pubmed: 27761120
Hum Mov Sci. 2012 Dec;31(6):1639-51
pubmed: 22513231
J Sports Sci. 2013;31(6):573-81
pubmed: 23186250
Hum Mov Sci. 2014 Dec;38:241-50
pubmed: 25457422
Hum Mov Sci. 2017 Aug;54:347-353
pubmed: 28688301
Sports Med. 2014 May;44(5):701-12
pubmed: 24510701
J Sports Sci. 2014;32(19):1751-9
pubmed: 24915106
Methods Enzymol. 2004;384:172-84
pubmed: 15081687
Sports Med. 2017 Jan;47(1):1-10
pubmed: 27251334
Hum Mov Sci. 2017 Dec;56(Pt A):173-175
pubmed: 28478982
J Sports Sci. 2012 May;30(9):871-7
pubmed: 22545768
J Strength Cond Res. 2020 Jul;34(7):2024-2030
pubmed: 29337830
PLoS One. 2017 Feb 23;12(2):e0172520
pubmed: 28231260
Hum Mov Sci. 2018 Apr;58:287-296
pubmed: 29549745
Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2000 Jun;278(6):H2039-49
pubmed: 10843903
Hum Mov Sci. 2016 Aug;48:74-81
pubmed: 27132155
PLoS One. 2017 Jul 14;12(7):e0180773
pubmed: 28708868
J Sci Med Sport. 2010 Nov;13(6):641-5
pubmed: 20594910
J Sports Sci. 2016 Sep;34(17):1596-601
pubmed: 26652039
Sports Med. 2018 Apr;48(4):799-836
pubmed: 29243038
Am J Physiol. 1994 Apr;266(4 Pt 2):H1643-56
pubmed: 8184944
Sports Med. 2010 Aug 1;40(8):625-34
pubmed: 20632735
Res Sports Med. 2018 Jan-Mar;26(1):51-63
pubmed: 29058465
J Sports Sci. 2005 Oct;23(10):1021-32
pubmed: 16194979
Sports Med. 2012 Aug 1;42(8):633-42
pubmed: 22715927
J Hum Kinet. 2016 Jul 2;51:153-163
pubmed: 28149378
Sports Med. 2013 Sep;43(9):765-72
pubmed: 23794235
J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Oct;30(10):2723-32
pubmed: 26890976
J Strength Cond Res. 2019 Aug;33(8):2202-2216
pubmed: 29702518
PLoS One. 2019 Jan 30;14(1):e0210191
pubmed: 30699148
J Sports Sci. 2015;33(12):1259-66
pubmed: 25782702
Sports Med. 2012 Jan 1;42(1):1-10
pubmed: 22149695
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1991 Mar 15;88(6):2297-301
pubmed: 11607165
J Sports Sci. 2016 Jul;34(14):1346-54
pubmed: 26928336
PLoS One. 2017 Jan 31;12(1):e0171156
pubmed: 28141823
J Sci Med Sport. 2014 Mar;17(2):229-33
pubmed: 23683687
Hum Mov Sci. 2015 Jun;41:92-102
pubmed: 25769114
J Sports Sci. 2002 Oct;20(10):771-81
pubmed: 12363294
Hum Mov Sci. 2016 Apr;46:39-51
pubmed: 26707679
Front Psychol. 2017 Sep 21;8:1645
pubmed: 28983273
Int J Sports Med. 2012 May;33(5):395-401
pubmed: 22377947
Springerplus. 2016 Aug 24;5(1):1410
pubmed: 27610328
PLoS One. 2014 May 09;9(5):e97145
pubmed: 24817186
J Sports Sci. 2013;31(14):1568-77
pubmed: 23631771
J Sci Med Sport. 2010 Jan;13(1):133-5
pubmed: 19054711
Front Psychol. 2017 Aug 28;8:1379
pubmed: 28894427
J Sports Sci. 2013;31(6):639-76
pubmed: 23249092
J Sports Sci. 2015;33(12):1238-47
pubmed: 25765524
Sports Med Open. 2019 Feb 11;5(1):6
pubmed: 30742241
Eur J Sport Sci. 2014;14 Suppl 1:S487-92
pubmed: 24444244
J Sports Sci. 2012;30(3):247-53
pubmed: 22176036
Sports Med. 2019 Sep;49(9):1337-1344
pubmed: 31016547
Hum Mov Sci. 2013 Aug;32(4):555-66
pubmed: 24054894
J Sports Sci. 2014 Dec;32(20):1831-1843
pubmed: 24787442
Behav Res Methods. 2012 Dec;44(4):1108-14
pubmed: 22477436
Springerplus. 2016 Feb 27;5:191
pubmed: 27026887
J Hum Kinet. 2018 Jun 13;62:145-155
pubmed: 29922386
J Sports Sci. 2014 Dec;32(20):1888-1896
pubmed: 25356995
J Sports Sci. 2016 Dec;34(24):2224-2232
pubmed: 27079483
Hum Mov Sci. 2017 Oct;55:172-181
pubmed: 28837900
Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2011 Sep;6(3):295-310
pubmed: 21911856
J Sports Sci Med. 2018 Aug 14;17(3):379-391
pubmed: 30116111
PLoS One. 2014 Sep 05;9(9):e107112
pubmed: 25191870
J Strength Cond Res. 2017 Sep;31(9):2398-2408
pubmed: 27806007
Sports Med. 2011 Mar 1;41(3):199-220
pubmed: 21395363
Res Q Exerc Sport. 2018 Mar;89(1):11-24
pubmed: 29351500
PLoS One. 2018 Jun 13;13(6):e0199008
pubmed: 29897985