Agility Stimulators and Their Effects on Traditional Testing Protocols Case Selected Male Soccer Players

Abstract

Baked on the theory, which advance the assessment of agility performance in the real game would depend on other factors such as Visual processing, Perception and Anticipation. To achieve this objective, we based on 18-meter test with five delimiters spaced by 3 meters between them, proposed in two situations.  Situation (A), we refer to traditional agility tests, in which, we change the cone with flex players. The opposite of the situation (B)  in which we integrate the Hexagonal Obstacle Test as part of the initial protocol  with five dynamic  players, asked to jump in four directions (left- center -/ right- center -front- center -back) into a single rhythm, coordinated by the examiner. For this proposal, 30 élite male Soccer Players participated in this study. Tested during the regional selection Oran league. Selected by attentional means based on their performance in 5-10-5 shuttle test.

The comparison of results achieved in the two situations shows significant differences between them. Opposite of correlations strongly significant between the tests used in this study. The main conclusion of the study is that athletes regardless their Agility mental skills improvement. Can use our protocol to test their difficulties, according to the environment variables, for better concordances of perceptual motor skills to operate simultaneously.  Record in the present study as strategy to improve Dynamic Decision Making, which involves continual decisions each with task-related tradeoffs, founded on cognitive functions such as visual processing, Timing, Reaction time Perception, and Anticipation as well as change of direction speed.

Keywords

• Agility Cognitive,Selected Male player,Soccer,test protocol

Agility Stimulators and Their Effects on Traditional Testing Protocols Case Selected Male Soccer Players

Abstract

Baked on the theory, which advance the assessment of agility performance in the real game would depend on other factors such as Visual processing, Perception and Anticipation. To achieve this objective, we based on 18-meter test with five delimiters spaced by 3 meters between them, proposed in two situations.  Situation (A), we refer to traditional agility tests, in which, we change the cone with flex players. The opposite of the situation (B)  in which we integrate the Hexagonal Obstacle Test as part of the initial protocol  with five dynamic  players, asked to jump in four directions (left- center -/ right- center -front- center -back) into a single rhythm, coordinated by the examiner. For this proposal, 30 élite male Soccer Players participated in this study. Tested during the regional selection Oran league. Selected by attentional means based on their performance in 5-10-5 shuttle test.

The comparison of results achieved in the two situations shows significant differences between them. Opposite of correlations strongly significant between the tests used in this study. The main conclusion of the study is that athletes regardless their Agility mental skills improvement. Can use our protocol to test their difficulties, according to the environment variables, for better concordances of perceptual motor skills to operate simultaneously.  Record in the present study as strategy to improve Dynamic Decision Making, which involves continual decisions each with task-related tradeoffs, founded on cognitive functions such as visual processing, Timing, Reaction time Perception, and Anticipation as well as change of direction speed.

Keywords

• Selected Male player,Soccer,Agility Cognitive,test protocol

References

1. Block, M. E. (2007). A teacher's guide to including students with disabilities in general physical education. Baltimore: Brookes Publishing Company.
2. Boichuk, R., Iermakov, S., Nosko, M., Kovtsun, V., & Nosko, Y. (2017). Influence of motor coordination indicators on efficiency of game activity of volleyball players at the stage of specialized basic training. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 17(4), 2632-2637. Doi:10.7752/jpes.2017.04301.
3. Dawes, J., & Roozen, M. (2012). Developing agility and quickness. Canada: Human Kinetics.
4. Goral, K. (2015). Examination of agility performances of soccer players according to their playing positions. The Sport Journal, 2015, 1. doi:10.17682/sportjournal/2015.004.
5. Joyce, D., & ‎Lewindon, D. (2014). High-Performance Training for Sports. Caanda: Human Kinetics.
6. Kutlu, M., Yapici, H., & Yilmaz, A. (2017). Reliability and validity of a new test of agility and skill for female amateur soccer players. Journal of human kinetics, 56(1), 219-227. Doi:10.1515/hukin-2017-0039.
7. Marriott, B. M. (1995). Not eating enough: Overcoming underconsumption of military operational rations. US: National Academies.
8. Matlák, J., Tihanyi, J., & Rácz, L. (2016). Relationship between reactive agility and change of direction speed in amateur soccer players. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 30(6), 1547-1552. Doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001262.

9. NSCA Kinetic Select, & Brown, L.E. (2018). Assessing Agility Using the T Test, 5-10-5 Shuttle, and Illinois Test. Retrieved from NSCA Store: https://www.nsca.com/education/articles/assessing_agility_using_testing/.
10. O'Neil, H. F., Perez, R. S., & Baker, E. L. (2014). Teaching and measuring cognitive readiness. New York, NY: Springer.
11. Paul, D. J., Gabbett, T. J., & Nassis, G. P. (2016). Agility in team sports: Testing, training and factors affecting performance. Sports Medicine, 46(3), 421-442. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-015-0428-2.
12. Piras, A., Roberto, L., & Salvatore, S. (2014). Response time, visual search strategy, and anticipatory skills in volleyball players. Journal of Ophthalmology, 2014, 1-10. doi:10.1155/2014/189268.
13. Porcari, J., Bryant, C., & Comana, F. (2015). Exercise physiology. Philadelphia: Davis Company.
14. Sheppard, J. M., Young, W. B., Doyle, T. L. A., Sheppard, T. A., & Newton, R. U. (2006). An evaluation of a new test of reactive agility and its relationship to sprint speed and change of direction speed. Journal of science and medicine in sport, 9(4), 342-349. Doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2006.05.019.
15. Stewart, P. F., Turner, A. N., & Miller, S. C. (2014). Reliability, factorial validity, and interrelationships of five commonly used change of direction speed tests. Scandinavian journal of medicine & science in sports, 24(3), 500-506. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.12019
16. Tanner, R., & Gore, C. (2012). Physiological tests for elite athletes. 2nd edition. Australian: Human Kinetics.
17. Veale, J. P., Pearce, A. J., & Carlson, J. S. (2010). Reliability and validity of a reactive agility test for Australian football. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 5(2), 239-248.
18. Young, W. B., Dawson, B., & Henry, G. J. (2015). Agility and change-of-direction speed are independent skills: Implications for training for agility in invasion sports. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, 10(1), 159-169. doi:doi.org/10.1260/1747-9541.10.1.159.
19. Zerf, M. (2016). Which visual sight skill tested and developed the interaction between central and peripheral vision case duels dribbling soccer skills. International Journal of Applied Exercise Physiology, 5(3), 31-37. doi:https://doi.org/10.22631/ijaep.v5i3.79.