Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Sports Medicine
Erschienen in: Sports Medicine 1/2018

16.09.2017 | Review Article

What’s Next in Complex Networks? Capturing the Concept of Attacking Play in Invasive Team Sports

verfasst von: João Ramos, Rui J. Lopes, Duarte Araújo

Erschienen in: Sports Medicine | Ausgabe 1/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The evolution of performance analysis within sports sciences is tied to technology development and practitioner demands. However, how individual and collective patterns self-organize and interact in invasive team sports remains elusive. Social network analysis has been recently proposed to resolve some aspects of this problem, and has proven successful in capturing collective features resulting from the interactions between team members as well as a powerful communication tool. Despite these advances, some fundamental team sports concepts such as an attacking play have not been properly captured by the more common applications of social network analysis to team sports performance. In this article, we propose a novel approach to team sports performance centered on sport concepts, namely that of an attacking play. Network theory and tools including temporal and bipartite or multilayered networks were used to capture this concept. We put forward eight questions directly related to team performance to discuss how common pitfalls in the use of network tools for capturing sports concepts can be avoided. Some answers are advanced in an attempt to be more precise in the description of team dynamics and to uncover other metrics directly applied to sport concepts, such as the structure and dynamics of attacking plays. Finally, we propose that, at this stage of knowledge, it may be advantageous to build up from fundamental sport concepts toward complex network theory and tools, and not the other way around.
Fußnoten
1
Analyzing only at ball passing restricts the analysis of team performance to the attacking phase. In the current article, we do not attempt to directly resolve this limitation.
 
2
An adjacency matrix, A, is a square matrix, with rows and columns representing nodes (e.g., players) with entry \(a_{ij}\) of A taking value 1 if there is a link between node i and node j; and 0 otherwise. Different types of networks lead to different matrix structures: undirected graphs are represented in symmetric adjacency matrices, the fact that the link between nodes i and j has no directionality is expressed in equality \(a_{ij} = a_{ji} ;\) in directed graphs (or digraphs), the links between nodes have a directionality; a link from node i to node j is expressed by entry \(a_{ij}\) taking value 1 independently of the value of \(a_{ji}\). In this article, the links represent actions by the players (e.g., making a pass) and are thus directed leading to digraphs. In what are called weighted graphs, the entries of the matrix can take other values \(w_{ij}\), called weights, that are not restricted to 0 or 1. The value taken by entry \(w_{ij}\) reflects the intensity or strength of that link. In an incidence matrix, E, rows represent nodes and columns represent links. The entry \(e_{ij}\) takes value 1 if the link j is incident on nodes i and j; 0 otherwise. In directed networks, values −1 and 1 are used to distinguish link origin and destination.
 
3
Degree of a vertex \(i, {\text{hence }}v_{i}\) is given by the number of nodes that are directly connected with the focal node: \({\text{Centrality}}_{\text{degree}} \left( {v_{i} } \right) = {\text{degree}}\left( {v_{i} } \right) = \mathop \sum \nolimits_{j}^{N} a_{ij}\) where \(i\) is the focal node, \(j\) represents all other nodes, \(N\) is the total number of nodes, and \(a\) is the adjacency matrix, in which cell \(a_{ij}\) is defined as 1 if node \(i\) is connected to node \(j\); and 0 otherwise.
 
4
Betweenness centrality expresses the degree in which one node lies on the shortest path between two other nodes: \({\text{Centrality}}_{\text{betweenness}} \left( {v_{i} } \right) = {\text{betweenness}}_{i} = \frac{{g_{st} (i)}}{{g_{st} }}\) where \(g_{st}\) is the number of shortest paths between vertices s and t, and \(g_{st} (i)\) is the number of those paths that pass through vertex i.
 
5
Closeness centrality for each node, \(v_{i}\) is the inverse sum of the shortest distance, \({\text{distance}}\;(i,j)\) to all other nodes, j, from the focal node, i, or how long the information takes to spread from a given node to others \({\text{Closeness}}_{\text{centrality}} (v_{i} ) = {\text{closenness}}_{c} (i) = [\varSigma_{j = 1}^{N} {\text{distance}}\; ( {\text{i,j)}}]^{ - 1}\).
 
6
Eigenvector centrality takes into consideration not only how many connections a vertex has (i.e., its degree), but also the degree of the vertices that it is connecting to. Each vertex \(i\) is assigned a weight \(x_{i} > 0\), which is defined to be proportional to the sum of the weights of all vertices that point to \(i: x_{i} = \lambda^{ - 1} \mathop \sum \nolimits_{j} A_{ij} x_{j}\) for some \(\lambda > 0\), or in matrix form: \(Ax = \lambda x\), where \(A\) is the (asymmetric) adjacency matrix of the graph, whose elements are \(A_{ij}\), and \(x\) is the vector whose elements are the \(x_{i}\), and \(\lambda\) is a constant (the eigenvalue).
 
7
Preferential attachments, also known as cumulative advantage or ‘rich-get-richer paradigm’. This property means that every new vertex probability \((p_{i} )\) to connect the existing vertices is higher for those who have already a large number of connections (connectivity \(k_{i}\)). For example, in a given team sports with a ball, when a player attracts more interactions from the game’s beginning, his/her connectivity will increase at a higher rate when compared with his/her team mates as the game is played (network grows). Therefore, starting with a small number \((m_{0} )\) of players interacting at the beginning of the game, at every time step that a new player \(m( \le m_{0} )\) interacts with \(m\) different team mates already active in the game, for preferential attachment, there is a probability \(p_{i} (k_{i} ) = \frac{{k_{i} }}{{\mathop \sum \nolimits_{j} k_{j} }}\) that the new player \(i\) will interact with a certain team mate, depending on the connectivity \(k_{i}\) of the latter.
 
8
The local clustering coefficient \(({\text{cc}}_{i} )\) for player \(i\) is defined by the proportion of actual edges/interactions \((e_{i} )\) between the \(n_{i} \ge 2\) common neighbors of a vertex/player i and the number of possible edges between them. \({\text{cc}}_{i} = \frac{{2e_{i} }}{{n_{i} \;(n_{i} - 1)}}\). The local clustering coefficient over the aggregate of all plays (Fig. 4) takes the following values: \({\text{cc}}_{\text{GK}} = 0,{\text{cc}}_{\text{LD}} = 1,{\text{cc}}_{\text{RD}} = 1, {\text{cc}}_{\text{MF}} = \frac{2}{3}, {\text{cc}}_{\text{CF}} = 1,\) where GK is the goalkeeper, LD/RD is the left/right defender, MF is the midfielder, and CF is the center forward.
 
9
The \(j{\text{th}}\) play local clustering coefficient \(( {\text{cc}}_{i} )\) for player \(i\) in the \(j{\text{th}}\) attacking is defined in a similar manner to the local clustering coefficient but takes into account only the players’ projection network formed in the \(j{\text{th}}\) attacking play. The \(2{\text{nd}}\)lay local clustering coefficient, \({\text{cc}}_{i,2} ,\) (Fig. 3) takes the following values:
\({\text{cc}}_{{{\text{GK}},2}} = 0,{\text{cc}}_{{{\text{LD}},2}} = 1,{\text{cc}}_{{{\text{RD}},2}} = \frac{1}{2},{\text{cc}}_{{{\text{MF}},2}} = 1,{\text{cc}}_{{{\text{CF}},2}} = 0\) where GK is the goalkeeper, LD/RD is the left/right defender, MF is the midfielder, and CF is the center forward.
 
10
The \(k\) aggregation local clustering coefficient \(( {\text{cc}}_{i,k}^{*} )\) for player \(i\) is defined by the average of the local cluster coefficients for player \(i\) over the \(M_{k} (k_{1} \;{\text{to}}\;k_{M} )\) attacking plays that compose the \(k\) aggregation. \(cc_{i,k}^{*} = \frac{1}{{M_{k} }}.\) The aggregate play local clustering coefficient, for the k aggregate composed of attacking plays 1 and 2, has the following values for each of the players: \({\text{cc}}_{\text{GKk}}^{*} = 0,\;{\text{cc}}_{\text{LD,k}}^{*} = \frac{1}{2}\left( {0 + 1} \right) = \frac{1}{2},\;{\text{cc}}_{\text{RD,k}}^{*} = \frac{1}{2}\left( {0 + \frac{1}{2}} \right) = \frac{1}{4},\;{\text{cc}}_{\text{MF,k}}^{*} = \frac{1}{2},\;cc_{CF,k}^{*} = 0,\) where GK is the goalkeeper, LD/RD is the left/right defender, MF is the midfielder, and CF is the center forward.
 
11
We define as the static network the static structure resulting from the aggregation over a time interval (e.g., the entire match) of all the observable edges (e.g., passes) within that interval.
 
12
Voronoi diagrams are geometric constructions representing the nearest geographical region of a player, a subset of a team, or even a team.
 
Literatur
1.
Passos P, Araújo D, Volossovitch A. Performance analysis in team sports. London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group; 2017.
2.
Glazier PS. Game, set and match? Substantive issues and future directions in performance analysis. Sports Med. 2010;40(8):625–34.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Hughes M, Franks IM. The essentials of performance analysis: an introduction, vol. xxxii. London: Routledge; 2008. p. 312.
4.
Frencken W. Soccer tactics: dynamics of small-sided games and full-sized matches. Groningen: University of Groningen—Faculty of Medical Sciences; 2012.
5.
Vilar L, Araújo D, Davids K, et al. The role of ecological dynamics in analysing performance in team sports. Sports Med. 2012;42(1):1–10.CrossRefPubMed
6.
7.
Bartlett R, Button C, Robins M, et al. Analysing team coordination patterns from player movement trajectories in soccer: methodological considerations. Int J Perform Anal Sport. 2012;12(2):398–424.CrossRef
8.
Davids K, Araújo D, Shuttleworth R. Applications of dynamical systems theory to football. Sci Footb V. 2005;537:550.
9.
10.
Chinellato DD, de Aguiar MA, Epstein IR, et al. Dynamical response of networks under external perturbations: exact results. 2007. Preprint arXiv:​0705.​4607.
11.
Silva P, Chung D, Carvalho T, et al. Practice effects on intra-team synergies in football teams. Hum Mov Sci. 2016;46:39–51.CrossRefPubMed
12.
13.
Passos P, Davids K, Araújo D, et al. Networks as a novel tool for studying team ball sports as complex social systems. J Sci Med Sport. 2011;14(2):170–6.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Grund TU. Network structure and team performance: the case of English Premier League soccer teams. Soc Netw. 2012;34(4):682–90.CrossRef
15.
Travassos B, Bourbousson J, Esteves PT, et al. Adaptive behaviours of attacking futsal teams to opposition defensive formations. Hum Mov Sci. 2016;47:98–105.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Freeman LC. Visualizing social networks. J Soc Struct. 2000;1(1):4.
17.
Rocha L. Exploring patterns of empirical networks. Umeå: Umeå University, Department of Physics; 2011. p. 66.
18.
Moody J, McFarland D, Bender-Demoll S. Dynamic network visualization. AJS. 2005;110(4):1206–41.
19.
20.
Newman MEJ. Networks: an introduction, vol. xi. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010. p. 772.CrossRef
21.
Brandes U, Freeman L, Wagner D. Social networks. In: RT, editor. Handbook of graph drawing and visualization. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2012.
22.
Eccles DW, Tenenbaum G. Why an expert team is more than a team of experts: a cognitive conceptualization of team coordination and communication in sport. J Sport Exerc Psychol. 2004;26:542–60.CrossRef
23.
Duarte R, Araújo D, Freire L, et al. Intra-and inter-group coordination patterns reveal collective behaviors of football players near the scoring zone. Hum Mov Sci. 2012;31(6):1639–51.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Bender-deMoll S, McFarland DA. The art and science of dynamic network visualization. J Soc Struct. 2006;7(2):1–38.
25.
Hill SA, Braha D. Dynamic model of time-dependent complex networks. Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2010;82(4):046105.CrossRefPubMed
26.
27.
Lucchesi M. Attacking aoccer: a tactical analysis. Spring City: Reedswain Publishing; 2001.
28.
Rocha L, Masuda N. Random walk centrality for temporal networks. New J Phys. 2014;16(6):063023.CrossRef
29.
Borgatti SP. Centrality and network flow. Soc Netw. 2005;27(1):55–71.CrossRef
30.
Pena JL, Touchette H. A network theory analysis of football strategies. 2012. Preprint arXiv:​1206.​6904.
31.
Clemente FM, Martins FML, Kalamaras D, et al. General network analysis of national soccer teams in FIFA World Cup 2014. Int J Perform Anal Sport. 2015;15(1):80–96.CrossRef
32.
33.
Correia V, Araújo D, Duarte R, et al. Changes in practice task constraints shape decision-making behaviours of team games players. J Sci Med Sport. 2012;15(3):244–9.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Newman MEJ. A measure of betweenness centrality based on random walks. Soc Netw. 2005;27(1):39–54.CrossRef
35.
Bonacich P. Power and centrality: a family of measures. Am J Sociol. 1987;92(5):1170–82.
36.
37.
Stephenson K, Zelen M. Rethinking centrality: methods and examples. Soc Netw. 1989;11(1):1–37.CrossRef
38.
Bonacich P. Factoring and weighting approaches to status scores and clique identification. J Math Sociol. 1972;2(1):113–20.CrossRef
39.
Cook KS, Emerson RM, Gillmore MR, et al. The distribution of power in exchange networks: theory and experimental results. Am J Sociol. 1983;89(2):275–305.
40.
Braha D, Bar-Yam Y. From centrality to temporary fame: dynamic centrality in complex networks: research articles. Complex. 2006;12(2):59–63.CrossRef
41.
Reagans R, Zuckerman EW. Networks, diversity, and productivity: the social capital of corporate R&D teams. Organ Sci. 2001;12(4):502–17.CrossRef
42.
Sparrowe RT, Liden RC, Wayne SJ, et al. Social networks and the performance of individuals and groups. Acad Manag J. 2001;44(2):316–25.CrossRef
43.
Balkundi P, Kilduff M. The ties that lead: a social network approach to leadership. Leadersh Q. 2006;17(4):419–39.CrossRef
44.
Cross R, Cummings JN. Tie and network correlates of individual performance in knowledge-intensive work. Acad Manag J. 2004;47(6):928–37.CrossRef
45.
Rapoport A. Spread of information through a population with socio-structural bias: I. Assumption of transitivity. Bull Math Biophys. 1953;15(4):523–33.CrossRef
46.
Easley D, Kleinberg JY. Networks, crowds, and markets: reasoning about a highly connected world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010.CrossRef
47.
48.
Holme P, Ghoshal G. Dynamics of networking agents competing for high centrality and low degree. Phys Rev Lett. 2006;96(9):098701.CrossRefPubMed
49.
Pacheco JM, Traulsen A, Nowak MA. Coevolution of strategy and structure in complex networks with dynamical linking. Phys Rev Lett. 2006;97(25):258103.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
50.
Van Segbroeck S, Santos FC, Pacheco JM. Adaptive contact networks change effective disease infectiousness and dynamics. PLoS Comput Biol. 2010;6(8):e1000895.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
51.
Shaw LB, Schwartz IB. Fluctuating epidemics on adaptive networks. Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2008;77(6):066101.CrossRefPubMed
52.
Barabasi A-L. The origin of bursts and heavy tails in human dynamics. Nature. 2005;435(7039):207–11.CrossRefPubMed
53.
Guillaume J-L, Latapy M. Bipartite graphs as models of complex networks. Phys A. 2006;371(2):795–813.CrossRef
54.
Lames M, Erdmann J, Walter F. Oscillations in football: order and disorder in spatial interactions between the two teams. Int J Sport Psychol. 2010;41:85–6.
55.
Frencken W, Lemmink K, Delleman N, et al. Oscillations of centroid position and surface area of soccer teams in small-sided games. Eur J Sport Sci. 2011;11(4):215–23.CrossRef
56.
Fonseca S, Milho J, Travassos B, et al. Measuring spatial interaction behavior in team sports using superimposed Voronoi diagrams. Int J Perform Anal Sport. 2013;13(1):179–89.CrossRef
57.
Kossinets G, Watts DJ. Empirical analysis of an evolving social network. Science. 2006;311(5757):88–90.CrossRefPubMed
58.
McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM. Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Annu Rev Sociol. 2001;27(1):415–44.CrossRef
59.
60.
61.
Johnson JH, Iravani P. The multilevel hypernetwork dynamics of complex systems of robot soccer agents. ACM Trans Auton Adapt Syst. 2007;2(2):5.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
What’s Next in Complex Networks? Capturing the Concept of Attacking Play in Invasive Team Sports
verfasst von
João Ramos
Rui J. Lopes
Duarte Araújo
Publikationsdatum
16.09.2017
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Sports Medicine / Ausgabe 1/2018
Print ISSN: 0112-1642
Elektronische ISSN: 1179-2035
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-017-0786-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2018

Sports Medicine 1/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Systematic Review

Factors Contributing to Chronic Ankle Instability: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Systematic Reviews

Original Research Article

Modified Maturity Offset Prediction Equations: Validation in Independent Longitudinal Samples of Boys and Girls

Original Research Article

Doping in Two Elite Athletics Competitions Assessed by Randomized-Response Surveys

Letter to the Editor

Comment on: “The Great British Medalists Project: A Review of Current Knowledge on the Development of the World’s Best Sporting Talent”

Correction

Correction to: Effectiveness of Exercise Interventions to Improve Postural Control in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of Centre of Pressure Measurements

Review Article

The Influence of Growth and Maturation on Stretch-Shortening Cycle Function in Youth

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie. Erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen. 
» Jetzt entdecken

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

23.04.2024 | Leitsymptom Rückenschmerzen | Nachrichten

Ärztliche Empathie hilft gegen Rückenschmerzen

18.04.2024 | Wirbelsäulenmetastase | Nachrichten

Stereotaktische Radiatio schlägt konventionelle Bestrahlung

16.04.2024 | Spondylitis ankylosans | Nachrichten

Vorsicht mit hohen NSAR-Dosen bei ankylosierender Spondylitis!

15.04.2024 | Knie-TEP | Nachrichten

Brustkrebs in der Vorgeschichte macht Gelenkersatz komplikationsträchtiger
weitere anzeigen

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise