2019
DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2019.1648120
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Technical and physical match performance of teams in the 2018 FIFA World Cup: Effects of two different playing styles

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
38
1
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
3
38
1
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Twenty-five technical performance-related match actions or events were chosen as variables in the present study and were divided into four groups (Table 1) based on previous studies [18,[34][35][36]. Definitions of these variables can be found in the previous studies [11,20,36].…”
Section: Technical Variables and Situational Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Twenty-five technical performance-related match actions or events were chosen as variables in the present study and were divided into four groups (Table 1) based on previous studies [18,[34][35][36]. Definitions of these variables can be found in the previous studies [11,20,36].…”
Section: Technical Variables and Situational Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Twenty-five technical performance-related match actions or events were chosen as variables in the present study and were divided into four groups (Table 1) based on previous studies [18,[34][35][36]. Definitions of these variables can be found in the previous studies [11,20,36]. The technical match data was analyzed under the following five situational variables: (1) competition stage: group stage and knockout stage; (2) match location: home and away; (3) quality of team: teams that qualified into the knockout stage and teams that didn't qualify into the knockout stage; (4) quality of opponent: opponents that qualified into the knockout stage and opponents that didn't qualify into the knockout stage; and (5) match outcome: win, draw and lose.…”
Section: Technical Variables and Situational Variablesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…High pressure, low pressure, pressure on wide areas, and pressure on central areas were the defensive styles of play identified (Fernandez-Navarro et al, 2016). Kempe et al (2014) showed that successful teams prefer possession play, and similarly, Yi et al (2019) showed that teams using possession play scored higher for the variables related to goal scoring, attacking and passing. However, according to other studies that explored further the characteristics of the possession style of play, by analyzing the factors that explain the self-organization in possession team play (Chassy, 2013), and examining the success of this possession play (Collet, 2013); the former study showed that possession itself did not predict shooting opportunities, and in the same way, the later demonstrated that possession was a poor predictor of performance when controlling for team quality and home advantage.…”
Section: Variable Definitionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Due to privacy concerns, the competition, the teams and the players used in this example are presented anonymised. During the match, players were tracked with a temporal resolution of 25Hz, by a camera-based tracking system with high accuracy, similar to other verified systems [57] used in similar studies [58,59]. This dataset was collected as the official dataset of the respective competition and contains 144,086 (x,y,t)-coordinates for each of the 22 players on the field.…”
Section: Case Study: Dataset and Reference Fragment Selectionmentioning
confidence: 99%