Examining how data becomes information for an upcoming opponent in football

Author:

Mehta Saumya1ORCID,Furley Philip1ORCID,Raabe Dominik1,Memmert Daniel1

Affiliation:

1. Institute of Exercise Training and Sport Informatics, German Sport University Cologne, Koln, Germany

Abstract

As the sport industry witnesses a surge in the type and volume of data-driven decisions, the general question of the process of information development remains: how is data used to develop meaningful information? And does the presence of novel quantitative data sources lend greater objectivity to match analysis? Study 1 examines how 12 football analysts use the same qualitative (video) and quantitative (event and position) data to develop information constituting a typical opponent report for an upcoming match, while Study 2 investigates the agreement between grade evaluations of these opponent reports by numerous professional coaches. Findings of Study 1 through independent-samples t-tests ( t(18) = 3.922, p = 0.001) indicate a clear dominance of qualitative video data over quantitative event and position data in all opponent reports. Despite the presence of quantitative data sources, analysts tend to prefer annotated video data. Possible relations to previous experience and familiarity with data, coach–analyst preferences and biases are discussed. Results from Study 2 show extremely weak intra-class correlations (ICC) ( r = 0.147; p = 0.011) between different grades awarded to the same video, depicting a clear lack of agreement in what coaches consider a good opponent report. Furthermore, coaches most valued the comprehensibility and relevance of the report. No significant associations were found between use of either data type and better grades. The subjectivity of the coaching process highlighting preferences regarding data validity and negotiations of adopting new key performance indicators (KPIs) is discussed, alongside limitations of the sample as well as the level of coach–analysts involved.

Funder

Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Social Sciences (miscellaneous)

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3