Silvan Steiner

Packing in football: A differential ecological perspective on passes

Introduction Packing has had its major appearance at the UEFA European Championship 2016. It indicates how many opponents are packed (“taken out” of the game) by a pass (http://www.impect.com/de) and has established as an inherent part of game statistics. In general, passes are more probably played to team members with open passing lanes, standing relatively close to the ball carrier, positioned in front of the ball, and defended loosely by opponent players (unpublished data). The goal of this study was to test whether passes with different packing differ in their relationships to ecological features of the game context. Methods Game data from five football competitions between some of Switzerland’s best-ranked U-18 teams were collected by the Local Positioning Measurement System of the Swiss Federal Institute of Sport. The system records the positions of opponent teams with little time latency and a high data resolution. Time synchronized videos were used to identify passing situations. 1778 completed passes were identified and categorized according to their packing. For each pass, the positions of all 22 players were exported to calculate the team members’ distance to the ball carrier, the openness of the passing lane, the defensive coverage, and the position before or behind the ball. Logistic regressions for binomial data were specified to estimate the effect of the ecological variables on passes with different packing. Results In contrast to the significant effects found when considering all passes, the openness of passing lanes was no ecological information that significantly affected passes with a packing of greater-than-or-equal to two. In a similar way, no effect of defensive coverage was found for passes with a packing of greater-than-or-equal to three. Discussion Passes with a packing of three and more do not show the characteristic effects of open passing lanes or loose defence of the intended receivers. They could, compared to passes with a lower packing, be considered risky passes. The findings may cautiously be interpreted in regard to the athletes’ specific use of ecological information. It might be argued that athletes playing passes with high packing oppress ecological information that are usually more heavily weighted in passing decisions. Or, they more heavily weigh or rely on other information to guide their passing behaviour. More research is required to prove the adequacy of this interpretation.

An Integrative Perspective on Interpersonal Coordination in Interactive Team Sports

Interpersonal coordination is a key factor in team performance. In interactive team sports, the limited predictability of a constantly changing context makes coordination challenging. Approaches that highlight the support provided by environmental information and theories of shared mental models provide potential explanations of how interpersonal coordination can nonetheless be established. In this article, we first outline the main assumptions of these approaches and consider criticisms that have been raised with regard to each. The aim of this article is to define a theoretical perspective that integrates the coordination mechanisms of the two approaches. In doing so, we borrow from a theoretical outline of group action. According to this outline, group action based on a priori shared mental models is an example of how interpersonal coordination is established from the top down. Interpersonal coordination in reaction to the perception of affordances represents the bottom-up component of group action. Both components are inextricably involved in the coordination of interactive sports teams. We further elaborate on the theoretical outline to integrate a third, constructivist approach. Integrating this third approach helps to explain interpersonal coordination in game situations for which no shared mental models are established and game situations that remain ambiguous in terms of perceived affordances. The article describes how hierarchical, sequential, and complex dimensions of action organization are important aspects of this constructivist perspective and how mental models may be involved. A basketball example is used to illustrate how top-down, bottom-up and constructivist processes may be simultaneously involved in enabling interpersonal coordination. Finally, we present the implications for research and practice.

Understanding the Successful Coordination of Team Behavior

In many areas of human life, people perform in teams. These teams’ performances depend, at least partly, on team members’ abilities to coordinate their contributions effectively. This includes the making of decisions and the regulation of behavior in reference to the framework provided by the social group- and task-context. Given the high relevance of a deepened and integrated understanding about the mechanisms underlying coordinated team behavior, the aim of this research topic is to provide a platform for different theoretical and methodological approaches to researching and understanding coordinated team behavior in different task contexts. The articles published in this edition offer a multifaceted insight into current work on the topic.

Understanding the successful co-ordination of team behavior

In many areas of human life, people perform in teams. These teams’ performances depend, at least partly, on team members’ abilities to coordinate their contributions effectively. This includes the making of decisions and the regulation of behavior in reference to the framework provided by the social group- and task-context. Given the high relevance of a deepened and integrated understanding about the mechanisms underlying coordinated team behavior, the aim of this research topic is to provide a platform for different theoretical and methodological approaches to researching and understanding coordinated team behavior in different task contexts. The articles published in this edition offer a multifaceted insight into current work on the topic.