EVALUATION OF THE GOALS SCORING PATTERNS AND THE RELATION BETWEEN TIME AND GOAL SCORING OF FOUR UEFA CHAMPIONS LEAGUE TOURNAMENTS

Y. Michailidis, A. Mandroukas, L. Vardakis, T. Metaxas
{"title":"EVALUATION OF THE GOALS SCORING PATTERNS AND THE RELATION BETWEEN TIME AND GOAL SCORING OF FOUR UEFA CHAMPIONS LEAGUE TOURNAMENTS","authors":"Y. Michailidis, A. Mandroukas, L. Vardakis, T. Metaxas","doi":"10.22190/FUPES180825029M","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this study was to compare time period and patterns of goal scoring in four UEFA Champions League (UCL) tournaments (2013-2017). All matches (n=500) of the four Champions League tournaments were recorded using video and analyzed with the software Sportsscout. Chi-square methods were used for the data analysis and the level of significance was set at p<0.05. The time period and scoring pattern comparison between UCL tournaments did not present any significant difference (X2=84.500, p>0.05 for the time period, X2=25.350, p>0.05 for open play and X2=7.503, p>0.05 for set play). The 15-min analysis for each tournament did not show any significant difference if we exclude all extra time periods. However, in UCL 2013-2014 and 2015-2016 more goals were scored in the second half (X2=9.696, p<0.05 and X2=7.496, p<0.05, respectively). With open play more goals were scored than set play (75% and 25% average, respectively). The action that scored the most goals in open play was combination and crosses (21.6% and 22.4% respectively) and in set play was corners and penalties (33.9%, all). The results showed that no differences occurred between CLs regarding the scoring patterns and time periods of scoring. However, goal scoring might be time dependent because more goals were scored in the second half. An explanation for this could be the fatigue and the tactical strategy. About the patterns, coaches must focus on training crosses and passing combinations. Also, they should give a lot of attention to corners of set plays.","PeriodicalId":304543,"journal":{"name":"Facta Universitatis, Series: Physical Education and Sport","volume":"103 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Facta Universitatis, Series: Physical Education and Sport","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22190/FUPES180825029M","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare time period and patterns of goal scoring in four UEFA Champions League (UCL) tournaments (2013-2017). All matches (n=500) of the four Champions League tournaments were recorded using video and analyzed with the software Sportsscout. Chi-square methods were used for the data analysis and the level of significance was set at p<0.05. The time period and scoring pattern comparison between UCL tournaments did not present any significant difference (X2=84.500, p>0.05 for the time period, X2=25.350, p>0.05 for open play and X2=7.503, p>0.05 for set play). The 15-min analysis for each tournament did not show any significant difference if we exclude all extra time periods. However, in UCL 2013-2014 and 2015-2016 more goals were scored in the second half (X2=9.696, p<0.05 and X2=7.496, p<0.05, respectively). With open play more goals were scored than set play (75% and 25% average, respectively). The action that scored the most goals in open play was combination and crosses (21.6% and 22.4% respectively) and in set play was corners and penalties (33.9%, all). The results showed that no differences occurred between CLs regarding the scoring patterns and time periods of scoring. However, goal scoring might be time dependent because more goals were scored in the second half. An explanation for this could be the fatigue and the tactical strategy. About the patterns, coaches must focus on training crosses and passing combinations. Also, they should give a lot of attention to corners of set plays.
四届欧洲冠军联赛进球模式及时间与进球关系的评价
本研究的目的是比较四届欧洲冠军联赛(UCL)比赛(2013-2017)的时间周期和进球模式。四场冠军联赛的所有比赛(n=500)都用视频记录下来,并用Sportsscout软件进行分析。采用卡方法进行数据分析,各时间段的显著性水平设为p0.05,其中开放式比赛X2=25.350, p>0.05;固定比赛X2=7.503, p>0.05)。如果我们排除所有额外的时间,每场比赛的15分钟分析没有显示出任何显著的差异。而在2013-2014赛季和2015-2016赛季,下半场进球数较多(X2=9.696, p<0.05, X2=7.496, p<0.05)。空挡比定位球进得多(平均分别为75%和25%)。在开放式比赛中,进球最多的是配合和传中(分别为21.6%和22.4%),而在定位球比赛中,进球最多的是角球和点球(均为33.9%)。结果表明,在评分模式和评分时间段上,CLs之间没有差异。然而,进球可能取决于时间,因为更多的进球是在下半场打进的。对此的解释可能是疲劳和战术策略。在模式上,教练必须注重训练传中和传球组合。同时,他们应该多注意定位球的角球。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信