The Cost of Losing Team Bias in Water Polo

Graham, James; Mayberry, John

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-52340-4_4

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the present number of offensive sequences was not different between groups and teams, and the total ball possessions seemed to be lower than those previously reported regarding the winning teams [ 23 ]. This can be due to different study methodologies since the number of possessions is impacted by the number of exclusion fouls and other events that increase offensive time and add to the length of a possession [ 28 ]. This is in agreement with the present study since it considered that ball possession encompasses all the offensive events that happen up to total ball loss and the team’s defensive recovery taking place.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, Serbia increased its number of passes in extended sequences, which is in line with Hughes et al [ 30 ]. The divergencies in study methodologies could contribute to the differences found in the present values to in those reported in the literature; however, it can also be due to rule changes and evolution of power-play performance, which is considered a key factor for game success [ 28 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Water Polo Offensive Methods after the 2018 FINA Rules Update

Canossa

Fernandes

Estriga

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Water polo is a team sport that has been suffering rule changes aiming for a more attractive game. Our goal was to unveil whether different offensive playing styles or methods were adopted by elite national teams from Eastern Europe and from other world countries after the new rules framework was applied at the 2019 FINA World Championship. Additionally, we questioned whether those rules induced a more dynamic game. A total of 648 offensive sequences from games contested by the top-six ranked national squads were analysed. Descriptive statistics, parametric and nonparametric tests were computed, and the effect size was used. The eastern Europeans were the tallest (t (76) = −4.081; p < 0.001, d = 0.42) and the Hungarians were higher than Italians (p = 0.005, dz = −0.41). Offensive time length differed between teams (H (5) = 30.50, p < 0.001) with Serbia being the fastest (Mdn = 22 s). In successful attacks without extra time, Italy was quicker than Spain (17.5 vs. 25.0 s; p = 0.031, dz = −0.36) scoring 30% of their total goals under 20 s, while Australia up to 24% and Croatia, Hungary and Spain ≤ 16.0%. When power-play occurred, the teams’ pass action was different (H (5) = 15.99, p < 0.007), with Italy performing more passes than counterparts, especially Serbia (Mdn = 13 vs. 9, respectively; p= 0.003, dz = 0.20) and with the exception of Hungary. Through fast play sequences, Italy, Serbia and Australia scored up to 33% of their goals, while Spain, Croatia, and Hungary scored ≤ 15%. The power-play contributed to ≥50% of teams’ goals, except for Spain and Australia (48 and 45%, respectively). Playing styles commonly attributed to Eastern vs. non-Eastern Europeans and other worldwide national teams such as Australia were not confirmed. However, offensive trends were perceived and described for the first time, and some base guidelines were suggested to distinguish the static or positional vs. a more dynamic playing model. Rule changes did not seem to induce the expected effects on game dynamics.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%