ORIGINAL PAPER
Describing the tactical knowledge used by young competitive soccer players: A psychophenomenological analysis
1
Laval University, Quebec, Canada
2
Faculty of Sports, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal
3
Department of Sporting and Physical Activity Techniques and Sciences, Paris-East Créteil University, Créteil, France
Submission date: 2020-09-23
Acceptance date: 2021-04-27
Publication date: 2022-02-21
Hum Mov. 2022;23(4):99-111
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Purpose:
Decision-making is the process through which players choose the most appropriate action to perform in the play. Previous investigations did not clearly portray the specific decisional background of learning players considering the progressing state of their capabilities and game knowledge. The study aimed to describe significant information picked up in situ and how young soccer players applied it to make decisions in the play.
Methods:
Three male soccer players aged 14 years were interviewed after 2 official district championship games in Portugal. Their games were filmed; the video sequences showing offensive actions were extracted and edited for visualization. Before questioning, each sequence was visualized for recalling the game actions. The explicitation interview technique was used to help the athletes describe in detail their recalled actions. In line with the recommendation in similar studies, a content analysis of the interviews was conducted to identify the decisional background and the links between elements of information picked up in situ and the decision itself.
Results:
The players did not perform a detailed judgement for every decision and were influenced by direct constraints such as opponent pressure. In contrast, they occasionally assessed risks and opportunities emerging in the game depending on their colleagues’ actions and the pitch zone. At times, they relied on their imagination of what their teammates would do with the action outcome.
Conclusions:
Key elements of the decisional background are common among learning players and can be used as a reference for further investigation or practical intervention in game teaching.
Decision-making is the process through which players choose the most appropriate action to perform in the play. Previous investigations did not clearly portray the specific decisional background of learning players considering the progressing state of their capabilities and game knowledge. The study aimed to describe significant information picked up in situ and how young soccer players applied it to make decisions in the play.
Methods:
Three male soccer players aged 14 years were interviewed after 2 official district championship games in Portugal. Their games were filmed; the video sequences showing offensive actions were extracted and edited for visualization. Before questioning, each sequence was visualized for recalling the game actions. The explicitation interview technique was used to help the athletes describe in detail their recalled actions. In line with the recommendation in similar studies, a content analysis of the interviews was conducted to identify the decisional background and the links between elements of information picked up in situ and the decision itself.
Results:
The players did not perform a detailed judgement for every decision and were influenced by direct constraints such as opponent pressure. In contrast, they occasionally assessed risks and opportunities emerging in the game depending on their colleagues’ actions and the pitch zone. At times, they relied on their imagination of what their teammates would do with the action outcome.
Conclusions:
Key elements of the decisional background are common among learning players and can be used as a reference for further investigation or practical intervention in game teaching.
REFERENCES (61)
1.
Vilar L, Araújo D, Davids K, Bar-Yam Y. Science of winning soccer: emergent pattern-forming dynamics in association football. J Syst Sci Complex. 2013;26(1):73–84; doi: 10.1007/s11424-013-2286-z.
2.
Matias CJ, Greco PJ. Cognition and action in team ball sports [in Portuguese]. Cienc Cogn. 2010;15(1):252–271.
3.
Orasanu J, Connolly T. The reinvention of decision making. In: Klein GA, Orasanu J, Calderwood R, Zsambok CE (eds.), Decision making in action: models and methods. Norwood: Ablex; 1995; 3–20.
4.
De Assis JV, Costa V, Casanova F, Cardoso F, Teoldo I. Visual search strategy and anticipation in tactical behawior of young soccer players. Sci Med Footb. 2021;5(2):158–164; doi: 10.1080/24733938.2020.1823462.
5.
Casanova F, Oliveira J, Williams M, Garganta J. Expertise and perceptual-cognitive performance in soccer: a review. Rev Port Cien Desp. 2009;9(1):115–122; doi: 10.5628/rpcd.09.01.115.
6.
Petiot GH, Aquino R, Cardoso F, Santos R, Teoldo I. What mental process favours quality decision-making in young soccer players? Motriz. 2017;23(3):e101735; doi: 10.1590/S1980-6574201700030003.
7.
Kannekens R, Elferink-Gemser MT, Visscher C. Tactical skills of world-class youth soccer teams. J Sports Sci. 2009;27(8):807–812; doi: 10.1080/02640410902894339.
8.
Práxedes A, Del Villar F, Pizarro D, Moreno A. The impact of nonlinear pedagogy on decision-making and execution in youth soccer players according to game actions. J Hum Kinet. 2018;62(1):185–198; doi: 10.1515/hukin-2017-0169.
9.
Mouchet A. Subjectivity as a resource for improving players’ decision making in team sport. In: Light R, Quay J, Harvey S, Mooney A (eds.), Contemporary developments in games teaching. Abingdon: Routledge; 2013; 149–166.
10.
Gesbert V, Durny A, Hauw D. How do soccer players adjust their activity in team coordination? An enactive phenomenological analysis. Front Psychol. 2017;8:854; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00854.
11.
Filho E, Tenenbaum G, Yang Y. Cohesion, team mental models, and collective efficacy: towards an integrated framework of team dynamics in sport. J Sports Sci. 2015;33(6):641–653; doi: 10.1080/02640414.2014.957714.
12.
Lavega-Burgués P, Luchoro-Parrilla RA, Serna J, Salas- Santandreu C, Aires-Araujo P, Rodríguez-Arregi R, et al. Enhancing multimodal learning through traditional sporting games: Marro360°. Front Psychol. 2020;11:1384; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01384.
13.
Allen-Collinson J. Sporting embodiment: sports studies and the (continuing) promise of phenomenology. Qual Res Sport Exerc. 2009;1(3):279–296; doi: 10.1080/19398440903192340.
14.
Light RL, Harvey S, Mouchet A. Improving ‘at-action’ decision-making in team sports through a holistic coaching approach. Sport, Education and Society. 2014;19(3):258–275.
15.
Mouchet A, Morgan K, Thomas G. Psychophenomenology and the explicitation interview for accessing subjective lived experience in sport coaching. Sport Educ Soc. 2014;19(3):258–275; doi: 10.1080/13573322.2012.665803.
16.
Raab M, Arnold A, Tielemann N. Judgment and decision making in sports: techniques for tactic training, tactics for technique training. In: Fricker P (ed.), Applied sport expertise & learning workshop, e-version. Canberra: Australian Institute of Sport; 2005; 1–3.
17.
Villemain A, Hauw D. A situated analysis of football goalkeepers’ experiences in critical game situations. Percept Mot Skills. 2014;119(3):811–824; doi: 10.2466/25.30.PMS.119c30z0.
18.
Mouchet A. Subjectivity in the articulation between strategy and tactics in team sports: an example in rugby. Ital J Sport Sci. 2005;12:24–33.
19.
Práxedes A, Moreno A, Sevil J, García-González L, Del Villar F. A preliminary study of the effects of a comprehensive teaching program, based on questioning, to improve tactical actions in young footballers. Percept Mot Skills. 2016;122(3):742–756; doi: 10.1177/0031512516649716.
20.
Griffin LL, Dodds P, Placek JH, Tremino F. Middle school students’ conceptions of soccer: their solutions to tactical problems. J Teach Phys Educ. 2001;20(4):324–340; doi: 10.1123/jtpe.20.4.324.
21.
Ward P, Williams AM, Ericsson KA. Underlying mechanisms of perceptual-cognitive expertise in soccer. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2003;25:S136.
22.
Mouchet A, Vermersch P, Bouthier D. Methodology of access to subjective experience: composite interview technique and video analysis [in French]. Savoirs. 2011;27(3):85–105; doi: 10.3917/savo.027.0085.
23.
Mangas C, Garganta J, Fonseca AM. A comparative study of the declarative knowledge of young football players depending on their competitive level [in Portuguese]. In: Suarez AA, Garganta J, Lago Peñas C (eds.), Football research: the Iberian studies [in Portuguese]. Porto: Faculdade de Ciencias do Desporto e de Educação Física, Universidade do Porto; 2002; 179–187.
24.
Tochon FV. Stimulated feedback, clinical objectification, shared reflection. Methodological foundations and practical applications of video feedback in research and training [in French]. Rev Sci Educ. 1996;22(3):467–502; doi: 10.7202/031889ar.
26.
Vermersch P. Explanatory assistance and reflective feedback [in French]. Educ Perm. 2004;160:71–80.
27.
Mouchet A. Characterization of the subjectivity in tactical decisions of elite rugby players [in French]. Doctoral thesis. Bordeaux: Université Victor Segalen Bordeaux 2; 2003.
28.
Ericsson KA, Simon HA. Protocol analysis: verbal reports as data, revised ed. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1993.
29.
Bardin L. Content analysis [in French], 2nd ed. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France; 2016.
30.
Gréhaigne J-F. Configurations of the game: debate and learning about football and team sports [in French]. Besançon: Presses Universitaires de Franche-Comté; 2007.
31.
Stelter R. Experience-based, body-anchored qualitative research interviewing. Qual Health Res. 2010;20(6):859–867; doi: 10.1177/1049732310364624.
32.
Mouchet A. Articulation of scientific models to sched light on the complexity of decisions in sport [in French]. In: Quidu M (ed.), Sports science in motion: innovations and theoretical traditions in sciences and techniques of physical and sports activities [in French]. Paris: L’Harmattan; 2012; 243–268.
33.
Da Costa IT, Garganta da Silva JM, Greco PJ, Mesquita I. Tactical principles of soccer: concepts and application. Motriz. 2009;15(3):657–668; doi: 10.5016/2488.
34.
Anguera MT, Hernández Mendo A. Observational methodology in sport sciences. Rev Cienc Deporte. 2013;9(3):135–160.
35.
Teoldo I, Guilherme J, Garganta J. Training football for smart playing: on tactical performance of teams and players. Curitiba: Appris; 2017.
36.
Raab M. Simple heuristics in sports. Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol. 2012;5(2):104–120; doi: 10.1080/1750984X.2012.654810.
37.
Parlebas P. Games, sports, and societies: a lexicon of motor praxeology [in French]. Paris: INSEP; 1999.
38.
Gibson JJ. The ecological approach to visual perception, classic edition. New York: Psychology Press; 2014.
39.
González-Víllora S, García-López L-M, Gutiérrez-Díaz del Campo D, Contreras-Jordán O-R. Tactical awareness and decision making in youth football players (12 years): a descriptive study [in Spanish]. J Study Educ Dev. 2010;33(4):489–501; doi: 10.1174/021037010793139644.
40.
Oliveira JG. Specific knowledge in football. Contributions to the definition of a dynamic matrix of the teaching-learning process and game practice [in Portuguese]. Porto: Faculdade de Desporto, Universidade do Porto; 2004.
41.
Schüler Giacomini D, de Oliveira Soares V, Santos HF, Matias CJ, Greco PJ. Declarative and procedural tactical knowledge in soccer players of different ages [in Portuguese]. Motricidade. 2011;7(1):43–53; doi: 10.6063/motricidade.119.
42.
Silva P, Garganta J, Araújo D, Davids K, Aguiar P. Shared knowledge or shared affordances? Insights from an ecological dynamics approach to team coordination in sports. Sports Med. 2013;43(9):765–772; doi: 10.1007/s40279-013-0070-9.
43.
Borges PH, Cabral de Andrade MO, Rechenchosky L, Teoldo da Costa I, Teixeira D, Rinaldi W. Tactical performance, anthropometry and physical fitness in young soccer players: a comparison between different maturational groups. J Phys Educ. 2017;28:e2826; doi: 10.4025/jphyseduc.v28i1.2826.
44.
Santos R, Duarte R, Davids K, Teoldo I. Interpersonal coordination in soccer: interpreting literature to enhance the representativeness of task design, from dyads to teams. Front Psychol. 2018;9:2550; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02550.
45.
Ribeiro J, Davids K, Araújo D, Guilherme J, Silva P, Garganta J. Exploiting bi-directional self-organizing tendencies in team sports: the role of the game model and tactical principles of play. Front Psychol. 2019;10:2213; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02213.
46.
Aguilar MP, Navarro-Adelantado V, Jonsson GK. Detection of ludic patterns in two triadic motor games and differences in decision complexity. Front Psychol. 2018;8:2259; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02259.
47.
Gama J, Passos P, Davids K, Relvas H, Ribeiro J, Vaz V, et al. Network analysis and intra-team activity in attacking phases of professional football. Int J Perform Anal Sport. 2014;14(3):692–708; doi: 10.1080/24748668.2014.11868752.
48.
Pic M, Lavega-Burgués P, March-Llanes J. Motor behaviour through traditional games. Educ Stud. 2019;45(6):742–755; doi: 10.1080/03055698.2018.1516630.
49.
Teoldo da Costa I, Cardoso F. Football training: teaching and evaluation of tactical behaviour [in Portuguese]. In: Ramos V, Angillo Saad M, Milistetd M (eds.), Collective sports games: research and teaching practice [in Portuguese]. Florianópolis: Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina; 2013; 107–130.
50.
Travassos B. Decision-making in futsal [in Portuguese]. Lisboa: Prime Books; 2014.
51.
Oppici L, Panchuk D, Serpiello FR, Farrow D. Long-term practice with domain-specific task constraints influences perceptual skills. Front Psychol. 2017;8:1387; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01387.
52.
Musculus L, Ruggeri A, Raab M, Lobinger B. A developmental perspective on option generation and selection. Dev Psychol. 2019;55(4):745–753; doi: 10.1037/dev0000665.
53.
Davids K, Button C, Bennett S. Dynamics of skill acquisition: a constraints-led approach. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 2008.
54.
Hockey J, Collinson JA. Grasping the phenomenology of sporting bodies. Int Rev Sociol Sport. 2007;42(2):115–131; doi: 10.1177/1012690207084747.
55.
Roca A, Ford PR, McRobert AP, Williams AM. Identifying the processes underpinning anticipation and decision- making in a dynamic time-constrained task. Cogn Process. 2011;12(3):301–310; doi: 10.1007/s10339-011-0392-1.
56.
Raab M. Implicit and explicit learning of decision making in sports is effected by complexity of situation. Int J Sport Psychol. 2003;34(4):273–288.
57.
Allen-Collinson J. Phenomenology of sensuous sporting bodies. Lincoln: University of Lincoln; 2015.
58.
Jones RL, Thomas GL. Coaching as ‘scaffolded’ practice: further insights into sport pedagogy. Sports Coach Rev. 2015;4(2):65–79; doi: 10.1080/21640629.2016.1157321.
59.
Moxley JH, Ericsson KA, Charness N, Krampe RT. The role of intuition and deliberative thinking in experts’ superior tactical decision-making. Cognition. 2012;124(1):72–78; doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.03.005.
60.
Jarrett K, Mouchet A, Harvey S, Scott C, Light R. Using elicitation interview within a phenomenographic framework: developing the breadth of research designs associated with game based approaches. Agora PE Sport. 2014;16(3):291–306.
61.
Mouchet A. Improving decision-making in sevens rugby. In: Light R, Evans JR, Harvey S, Hassanin R (eds.), Advances in rugby coaching: an holistic approach. London: Routledge; 2015; 40–52.
| eISSN: | 1899-1955 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
