Sports Performance Analysis

Word count:
(Excluding references and appendices)
Student reflections: Make a comment in response to each of the questions
How has this piece of work contributed to your learning?
What are your perceived strengths?

What areas do you need to further develop?

What actions will you take to improve your next submission?
By submitting this work, I certify that this assignment is a result of my own work and that all sources have been acknowledged.
Marker comments: (Students to leave this blank)
General comments
(in relation to the marking criteria):
Writing / Presentation :
Key actions for improvement:
Marked by:
(include date) Moderated by:
(include date)
Mark awarded
(This grade is not confirmed until the exam board)

Sports Performance Analysis Report
The Analysis of passes that lead to a chance created at EPL level
Introduction
Performance and match analysis in the sport of football plays a crucial role in most elite/professional level teams these days. At some elite level clubs there is a whole team including a match day and post-match analyst, opposition analyst, recruitment analyst and a youth team analyst (Murray 2011). It has established itself as a pivotal tool in which coaches can best measure, analyse and improve a team?s performance (Duckett). There are many aspects in which can be observed, noted and analysed but I will be look to analysing the passing of a team at premier league level. The purpose of this report will be to analyse an successful opposition team?s passing from the lead up to a chance on goal from the EPL and to thereafter provide clear results that can be easily interpreted and used by a coach to aid the performance of the team by trying to counter-act there patterns of play. Passing within football can vary from long to short, to feet or in behind, lofted or along the floor. All these combinations of various passes moulds how a team plays. A prime example being Tiki-taka once performed and still to a certain extent by Barcelona fc which involves a lot of short and snappy passes to player?s feet. A contrasting style could that of West Ham whereby they use the long pass in a high amount of occasions to go forward and create attacking chances. These different variations shows that all teams utilise different passes, in different amounts and with varied degrees of effectiveness and therefore understanding what passes a team uses is key in preparing how to set up defensively to stop the opposition from being successful.
Aspect of the sport
As I have already stated in the introduction I will be focusing on the passing build up play to chance on goal. Passing is key

References:
Jonathan Duckett (2012) OBJECTIVITY IN ANALYSIS
Adam-Murray (2011) The Crucial Role Of Performance Analysis In Football

SSP4016 Writ 1 Performance Analysis Report

Marks are awarded as follows for different areas:

Introduction (200 words, 5%) ? a concise introduction explaining the scope and purpose of the report.

Aspect of the sport (600-700 words, 15%) ? justification of an important and relevant aspect of performance in the chosen sport. A good justification of the validity of the aspect of the sport and a rationale for analysing this aspect of the sport.
? Description of the aspect of the sport 5%
? Justifying the relevance and importance of the aspect of the sport 5%
? Using supporting professional and / or academic literature 5%

Operationalising the chosen aspect (400-500 words, 15%) ? specifying clearly defined performance variables that represent the chosen aspect of the sport.
? Clarity of information required (outputs) 5%
? Clarity of data to be collected 5%
? Correct use of terminology such as action variables and performance indicators 5%

Describing the System (800 words, 20%) ? a good description of input data required to produce the required outputs and the manual forms used to gather these data. A justification for the types of form used that demonstrates a good understanding of different types of manual notation method. The guidance for the observational procedures to be used when recording data.
? Appropriateness of the forms used 5%
? Presentation of the forms 5%
? Description of data sources 5%
? Description of operating procedures 5%

Reflection on system development (300 words, 5%) ? evidence of pilot work, performance analysis principle learned during system development and an effective summary of the kinds of decisions made during pilot work.

System results (400 words, 15%) ? a well communicated presentation about the performances analysed making effective use of clear tables and / or diagrams that have visual impact and support potential coaching decisions.
? Presentation of the results 5%
? Key findings specific to the individual performance(s) are highlighted 5%
? Correctness of interpretation of the results 5%

Findings about the system (300 words, 5%) ? a discussion of the experience of using the system that shows a good understanding of usability issues and sources of error in observational analysis.

Findings about the information produced (600 words, 10%) ? a discussion of the usefulness of the performance variables produced demonstrating good knowledge of the qualities of performance indicators. The discussion should also demonstrate a good knowledge of validity of different types of sports performance variables.
? Demonstrating knowledge of different information types 5%
? Evaluation of usefulness of information for decision making by coaches and players 5%

Conclusions (300 words, 5%) ? a concise drawing of what has been concluded about the system based on the practical exercise. This should include recommendations that can be supported by the evidence provided by the practical exercise.

References (5%) ? use the correct referencing system in the text of the report and the reference list at the end.

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA ? PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS REPORT (SSP4016 WRIT 1)
Classification %Range Introduction 5% Justify aspect of the sport 15% Operational definitions 15%
I
[Outstanding Work] 80 ? 100 Outstanding description of aims, scope and structure of the report. An outstanding justification of the importance of the chosen aspect, supported by reference to recent and relevant supporting literature. Outstanding use of operational definitions to clearly define the variables produced and the sports events recorded.
I
[Excellent Work] 70 ? 79 Excellent description of aims, scope and structure of the report. An excellent justification of the importance of the chosen aspect, supported by reference to recent and relevant supporting literature. Excellent use of operational definitions to clearly define the variables produced and the sports events recorded.
II(i)
[Good Quality Work] 60 ? 69 Good description of aims, scope and structure of the report. An good justification of the importance of the chosen aspect, supported by reference to relevant supporting literature. Good use of operational definitions to clearly define the sports events recorded and relate these to outputs.
II(ii)
[Acceptable Work] 50 ? 59 An acceptable introduction to the report with one of the scope, aims or structure being described short of a good description. An acceptable justification of the importance of the chosen aspect, supported by reference to relevant supporting literature. Acceptable use of operational definitions to clearly define the sports events recorded and relate these to outputs.
III
[Adequate Work] 40 ? 49 An adequate introduction to the report with one of the scope, aims or structure being missing from the introduction. An adequate description of the chosen aspect, supported by reference to literature. Adequate definitions of the sports events recorded but with some vague definitions.
Fail (marginal)
[Limited Work] 35 ? 39 The introduction fails to describe the scope, purpose or structure of the report. The description of the chosen aspect fails to justify its importance, but does demonstrate knowledge of the sport. The descriptions of events are not clear and there is na?ve use of terminology.
Fail
[Unacceptable Work] 0 ? 34 The introduction fails to describe two or more scope, purpose or structure of the report. The description of the chosen aspect is confused, unjustified and lacking support from relevant literature. There is confusion between events to be recorded and information to be produced by the system with poor use of terminology.

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA ? PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS REPORT (SSP4016 WRIT 1)
Classification %Range System description 20% Reflection on system development 5% Presentation of system results 15%
I
[Outstanding Work] 80 ? 100 The student has developed an outstanding system that is well presented, clearly identifying data sources and outputs. Outstanding description of the system development experience, pilot work that was done and changes made as a result. The results have been determined correctly and their interpretation and presentation is outstanding. Outstanding points made about the particular performance(s).
I
[Excellent Work] 70 ? 79 The student has developed an excellent system that is well presented, identifying data sources and outputs. Excellent description of the system development experience, pilot work that was done and changes made as a result. The results are correct. Excellent interpretation and presentation of the results about the specific performance.
II(i)
[Good Quality Work] 60 ? 69 The student has developed an good system that is well presented, identifying data sources and outputs. Good description of the system development experience, pilot work that was done and changes made as a result. The results are correct. Good interpretation and presentation of the results about the specific performance.
II(ii)
[Acceptable Work] 50 ? 59 The student has developed an acceptable system that is well presented, identifying data sources and outputs. However, operating procedures have been neglected. Acceptable description of the system development experience and pilot. Acceptable interpretation and presentation of the results about the specific performance. However, the student missed the opportunity to present some key findings about the particular performance.
III
[Adequate Work] 40 ? 49 The student has developed an adequate system that lacks ambition. There are inconsistencies between the form(s) used and the data sources described or no information about operating procedures. Adequate description of the system development process but there is a lack of detail about pilot work. Adequate interpretation of the results but the presentation could have been more effective. The student missed the opportunity to present some key findings about the particular performance.
Fail (marginal)
[Limited Work] 35 ? 39 The presentation of the system is not acceptable or the system is not appropriate for the given aspect of the given sport. The student has failed to reflect on the system development experience and there is little evidence of pilot work. The results fail to correctly describe the performance and the presentation of the results lacks impact. There is little attempt to tailor the results to the requirements of the specific performance situation.
Fail
[Unacceptable Work] 0 ? 34 The description of the system fails to articulate how the form(s) are used and there are errors in understanding of the application of different types of form. The student has failed to reflect on the system development experience and there is no evidence of pilot work. The results are incorrect and poorly presented.
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA ? PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS REPORT (SSP4016 WRIT 1)
Classification %Range Findings about system use 5% Findings about information produced 10% Conclusions 5%
I
[Outstanding Work] 80 ? 100 Outstanding reflections on the usability of the system that correctly classifies different observational errors that may have been made. Outstanding reflection on the information produced by the analysis, listing decisions that can be supported with the information. The answer shows an outstanding knowledge of different information types. Outstanding conclusions drawn with clear and concise recommendations for the particular performers as well as implications for system use.
I
[Excellent Work] 70 ? 79 Excellent reflections on the usability of the system that describes different observational errors that may have been made. Excellent reflection on the information produced by the analysis, listing decisions that can be supported with the information. The answer shows a good knowledge of different information types. Excellent conclusions drawn with clear and concise recommendations for the particular performers as well as implications for system use.
II(i)
[Good Quality Work] 60 ? 69 Good reflections on the use of the system that describes different observational errors that may have been made. Good reflection on the information produced and its use. The answer shows a good knowledge of different information types. Good conclusions drawn with clear and concise recommendations for the particular performers as well as implications for system use.
II(ii)
[Acceptable Work] 50 ? 59 Acceptable reflections on the use of the system and issues occurring during observation of the performance. Acceptable reflection on the information produced by the analysis. The answer shows acceptable knowledge of different information types. Acceptable conclusions drawn with clear and concise recommendations for the particular performers as well as implications for system use.
III
[Adequate Work] 40 ? 49 Adequate reflections on the use of the system with some limited coverage of issues during data collection. Adequate reflection on the information produced by the analysis. There are, however, some errors in the terminology used. Adequate conclusions drawn with clear and concise recommendations for the particular performers or implications for system use.
Fail (marginal)
[Limited Work] 35 ? 39 The reflection fails to articulate usability issues or potential sources of inaccuracy. The reflection on the information produced fails to discuss its use in coaching. There terminology used is na?ve. The conclusions drawn are unclear with recommendations or practical implications not listed.
Fail
[Unacceptable Work] 0 ? 34 The student has failed to reflect on the experience of using the system and has demonstrated a flawed understanding of observational errors. There is a poorly written reflection on the information produced by the system that fails to identify its use in coaching. The student shows little understanding of performance indicators and other information types. The conclusions are presented poorly with recommendations and practical implications not listed.

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA ? PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS REPORT (SSP4016 WRIT 1)
Classification %Range References 5%
I
[Outstanding Work] 80 ? 100 Outstanding use of supporting literature in the text with correct referencing style used in the text of the report and the reference list at the end.
I
[Excellent Work] 70 ? 79 Excellent use of supporting literature in the text with correct referencing style used in the text of the report and the reference list at the end.
II(i)
[Good Quality Work] 60 ? 69 Good use of supporting literature in the text with correct referencing style used in the text of the report and the reference list at the end with the exception of one or two errors.
II(ii)
[Acceptable Work] 50 ? 59 Acceptable use of supporting literature in the text allowing the reader to identify sources. However, the correct referencing style has not been used.
III
[Adequate Work] 40 ? 49 Adequate use of literature in the text allowing the reader to identify sources. However, the correct referencing style has not been used and there is at least one reference missing from the reference list.
Fail (marginal)
[Limited Work] 35 ? 39 The report fails to use supporting literature correctly and there are several referencing errors in the text of the report and in the reference list.
Fail
[Unacceptable Work] 0 ? 34 There are major referencing errors and possibly no references used at all.

find the cost of your paper