Acta Univ. Palacki. Olomuc., Gymn. 2009 39(4): 33-40

Differences in rotations between the winning and losing teams at the youth European volleyball championships for girls

Marko Zadražnik1, Nenad Marelić2, Tomica Rešetar2
1 Faculty of Sport, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana
2 Faculty of kinesiology, University of Zagreb, Zagreb

Background: Researchers of the game of volleyball often study the differences that separate the winning and losing teams. Namely, the volleyball game runs in two complexes (K1 - game after receive of serve: serve - receipt of serve - setting the attack - attack; K2 - game after own serve: serve - block - defence - counter attack), in addition the players have to rotate in accordance with the rules of the game of volleyball. Playing situations in six rotations do not equally correlate to K1 and K2 in their tactical aspect, nor are they of the same difficulty.

Objectives: The study examined whether there are statistically significant differences in the phases of a volleyball game between the winners and losers for each of the six volleyball rotations separately. Differences in individual rotations between winning and losing teams were examined. For rotations with statistically significant differences between the teams, the phases that determine those differences the most were also researched.

Methods: The study was carried out at the European youth volleyball championships for women. Twenty games were analysed, a five level scale was used to evaluate the successfulness of the game for 98 under 18 years old women players. Six phases of the volleyball game were analysed: serve, receipt of serve, attack in K1, attack in K2, block and defence (attack receipt). A criterion variable was represented with each individual rotation. Simple descriptive statistical parameters were calculated together with six canonical discriminant analyses, one for each of the volleyball rotations.

Results: The results of canonical discriminatory analysis revealed that four out of six volleyball rotations were statistically significant at the level of p < 0.05 (rotation 1 = 0.02; rotation 2 = 0.00; rotation 3 = 0.00; rotation 6 = 0.04). It is interesting to notice that different game phases show the largest projection of discriminatory function exactly in the rotations with statistically significant differences. They were: receipt of serve and attack in K1 and K2 for rotation 1, receipt of serve, block and defence for rotation 2, serve and defence for rotation 3, attack in K1 for rotation 6.

Conclusions: These results point to the specific characteristics of individual rotations in this age period, which have to be considered in the organisation of the training process. The results undoubtedly indicate that in the process of the synchronisation of team play, each of the six rotations require specific attention both in the technical and tactical sense.

Keywords: Volleyball, women, phases, successfulness of game

Prepublished online: March 26, 2010; Published: September 1, 2009  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Zadražnik, M., Marelić, N., & Rešetar, T. (2009). Differences in rotations between the winning and losing teams at the youth European volleyball championships for girls. Acta Universitatis Palackianae Olomucensis. Gymnica39(4), 33-40
Download citation

References

  1. Đurković, T. (2007). An analysis of the effects of situational parameters on the game efficiency of rotations at the Youth EC in volleyball for men. Master's thesis, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Kinesiology, Zagreb.
  2. Ejem, M. (2001). A brief technical evaluation of the 27th Olympiad in Sydney. The Coach, 1, 6-12. Go to original source...
  3. Eom, H. J., & Schutz, R. W. (1992). Statistical analyses of volleyball team performance. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 63, 11-18. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
  4. Frohner, B., & Zimmermann, B. (2007). So sehen Sieger aus. Volleyball Magazin, 3, 21-25.
  5. Golf, B. (2008a). Olympia analyse. Volleyball magazine, 1, 21-27.
  6. Golf, B. (2008b). Olympia analyse. Volleyball magazine, 10, 14-16.
  7. Hughes, M., & Daniel, R. (2003). Playing patterns of elite and non elite volleyball. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 3(1), 50-56. Go to original source...
  8. Marelić, N., Rešetar, T., & Janković V. (2004). Discriminant analysis of the sets won and the sets lost by one team in the A1 Italian volleyball league: A case study. Kinesiology - International Journal of Fundamental and Applied Kinesiology, 36(1), 75-82.
  9. Marelič, N., Rešetar, T., Zadražnik, M., & Đurković, T., (2005). Modelling of situation parameters in top level volleyball. In D. Milanović & F. Prot (Eds.), Proceedings book of the 4th International Scientific Conference on Kinesiology "Science and profession: A challenge for the future" (p. 459-464). Zagreb: University of Zagreb.
  10. Match Info. (2009a). FIVB. Retrieved 28. 9. 2009 from the World Wide Web: http://www.fivb.org/EN/Volleyball/Competitions/Olympics/2008/W/Press/MatchInfo.asp
  11. Match Info. (2009b). FIVB. Retrieved 28. 9. 2009 from the World Wide Web: http://www.fivb.org/EN/Volleyball/Competitions/Olympics/2008/M/Press/MatchInfo.asp
  12. Morrow, J. R., Jackson, A. S., Hosler, W. W., " Kachurik, J. K. (1979). The importance of strength, speed and body size for team success in women's intercollegiate volleyball. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 50(3), 429-437. Go to original source...
  13. Munz, M. (2008). Olympia analyse. Volleyball magazine, 12, 17-23.
  14. Palao, J. M., Santos, J. A., & Ureña, A. (2004). Effect of team level on skill performance in volleyball. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 4(2), 50-60. Go to original source...
  15. Palao, J. M., Santos, J. A., & Ureña, A. (2005). The effect of the setter's position on the spike in volleyball. Journal of Human Movement Studies, 48(1), 25-40.
  16. Stamm, R. (2004). Body build structure of young female volleyballers (aged 13-16) and their performance in competition. Manking Quarterly, 44(3-4), 253-273. Go to original source...
  17. Yiannis, L., & Panagiotis, K. (2005). Evolution in men's volleyball skills and tactics as evidenced in the Athens 2004 Olympic Games. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 5(2), 1-8. Go to original source...
  18. Zadražnik, M. (1999). Assessing competitive and potential successfulness of advanced young volleyball players. Kinesiologia Slovenica, 5(1/2), 45-50.
  19. Zetou, E., Tsigilis, N., Moustakidis, A., & Komninakidou, A. (2006). Playing characteristics of men's Olympic volleyball teams in complex II. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 6(1), 172-177. Go to original source...

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.