PCE: penalties Flashcards
penalty kick research
~25% of PK’s are missed! (Kuhn, 1988; Jordet, 2009)
England and Holland worst performers (Jordet, 2009)
PK’s have increasing importance in modern football (Yiannakos & Armatas, 2006)
Most ‘attention’ research on this skill has been done from the goalkeeper’s perspective (see Savelsbergh et al., 2005).
penalties
74.2% probability of scoring a goal while the goalkeeper can save the ball only in about 18.8% of cases (Dohmen, 2008).
The ball travels at speeds from 50 to 100 km/h and thus crosses the goal line after an average of 600 ms after the ball was hit (Franks & Hanvey, 1997).
goalkeepers seem to use predictive cues to anticipate where the penalty might go
(Note they probably use probability too / and understanding past data from each taker
similar in ice-hockey - see research by Panchuk
Savelsbergh et al. (2002)
experts better than novices
easier to determine side than height
experts responded slower
experts have longer fixations
number of places looked less
number of fixations made is less
experts look at head and ball for longer than novices
novices spend more time looking at arm, trunk, hips
experts pay more attention to the kicking leg, the non-kicking leg, and the ball, whereas novices fixate on the torso, arm and hip region
part of the skill-dependent diffs in prediction accuracy might potentially be explained by diffs in eye movement behav
criticism of occlusion research
not representative
change movement = change in findings
search rate
watch video simulation
verbal response
movement response
in situ situation - verbal
situ - motor response
intercept ball
Dicks et al. (2010)
gaze behaviour in football
Even over time there were differences in what was fixated depending on task demands.
We may have to be careful about what we ‘read into’ research using film (??)
more time looking at ball when intercept
phd Qs
Previous research (Kuhn, 1998) has suggested that up to 70% of penalty kicks are shot with the shooter focusing on the ‘keeper!
They don’t look to where they are shooting!!!!
gaze behav and shooting strats in football PKs - implications of a ‘keeper-dependent approach’
(Wood and Wilson, 2010)
better shooters used a target-focused approach more freq while poorer shooters used ‘goalkeeper-focused’ strat
KD less accurate
look at target = more accurate
best focus more on KI and OI
look where shooting to be most accurate
Wood and Wilson (2010) results
KI strategy (22%) look where they aiming.
KD strategy (52%) look centrally and try to hit corner.
OI strategy (26%) look one way and shoot to the other.
But KD was significantly LESS accurate!!!
aiming to deceive - examining the role of the QE during deceptive aiming actions - conclusions
Failure to look where you intend to shoot disrupts shooting accuracy.
Despite this players tend to rely on the sub-optimal Keeper-dependent strategy.
it could be argued that if the player watches the goalkeeper dive in one direction then they can shoot a shot in the opposite direction without the need for accuracy! However…..
exploring the merits of perceptual anticipation in the soccer penalty kick
van der Kamp (2011)
it is argued that penalty takers should select a target location in advance of the run-up to the ball and disregard the GKs actions
don’t add extra level of complexity
anecdotal evidence
Dimitar Berbatov (2009) after missing his penalty in the shoot out
‘I was looking for the goalkeeper and in the last moment he took the angle I was going for, so he saved it’
performing under pressure - what can we learn from football PKs?
neutral conditions - 85%
threat conditions - playing to lose - 62%
challenge conditions - playing to win - 92%
attentional control theory
The most general assumption of ACT is that worry increases the allocation of attentional resources to the detection of threat-related stimuli in anxiety- inducing situations (Eysenck et al., 2007).
The authors attribute this impairment of attentional control to a disruption in the balance of two attentional systems: a goal-directed (top–down) and a stimulus–driven (bottom-up) attentional system (Corbetta & Shulman, 2002).
anxiety makes us more focused on stimulus driven system
anxiety disrupts the efficient recruitment of top-down cortical processes by enhancing the effect of stimulus-driven processes
Anxiety makes us hyper-distractible (internal and external)
anxiety makes us look for threats and focus on threats
control of goal-directed and stim-driven attention in the brain
diagram
