A Step towards a Field Based Agility Test in Team Sports

David Drake, Rodney Kennedy, Jonny Davis, Matthew Godfrey, Simon McLeod, Amy Davis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Agility performance tests are limited by the requirement forforce plates, timing gates or expensive camera systemsmaking application into practice challenging. The primaryaim of this study was to assess the inter-rater reliability of afield based 1v1 agility test encompassing perceptual-actionperformance. A secondary aim was to assess the relationshipbetween the 1v1 agility tests with a range of physicalperformance tests including a commonly used Y step test.The third aim was to contrast the physical performance ofhigh performing players against lower performing playersin terms of agility action performance. Twenty-eight malerugby union players volunteered (age 19.3 ± 2.2 years, agerange 18-24, body mass 96.5 ± 13.3 kg). Participants wererandomly assigned to attack or defensive roles within a simulatedrugby evasion task (1v1 agility test). Previously utilizedperformance scoring (1) was modified to assess agilityperformance. Two independent investigators reviewedvideo recordings to score attacking and defensive performance.Cohens Kappa statistic showed inter-rater reliabilityof agility scoring to be almost perfect, 861 (CI 0.816 to0.917). Attacking agility had a large significant relationshipwith Y step performance (r = -0.577, p = 0.001), single legrepeat hop height (r = 0.570, p = 0.002) and body mass (r= -0.537, p = 0.003). Defensive agility outcome had a largesignificant relationship with CMJ flight time-contraction timeratio (r = 0.580, p = 0.001) and CMJ concentric duration (r =-0.656, p = 0.000). The Y step test shares 33% of commonvariance with 1v1 attacking and 5% with defensive agilityperformance likely due to significantly greater frontal andtransverse plane movement during agility compared to thechange of direction tests. We recommended the 1v1 agilitytest be included as part of physical profiling of team sportsplayers.
LanguageEnglish
Pages1-7
JournalInternational Journal of Sports and Exercise Medicine
Volume3 (6)
Publication statusPublished - 23 Nov 2017

Fingerprint

Exercise Test
Sports
Humulus
Research Personnel
Direction compound

Keywords

  • Change of direction
  • Athletic performance
  • Perceptual decision
  • making
  • Rehabilitation
  • Rugby union

Cite this

Drake, D., Kennedy, R., Davis, J., Godfrey, M., McLeod, S., & Davis, A. (2017). A Step towards a Field Based Agility Test in Team Sports. 3 (6), 1-7.
Drake, David ; Kennedy, Rodney ; Davis, Jonny ; Godfrey, Matthew ; McLeod, Simon ; Davis, Amy. / A Step towards a Field Based Agility Test in Team Sports. 2017 ; Vol. 3 (6). pp. 1-7.
@article{f6011caaf40c4ae3bbd45dbe84121d6a,
title = "A Step towards a Field Based Agility Test in Team Sports",
abstract = "Agility performance tests are limited by the requirement forforce plates, timing gates or expensive camera systemsmaking application into practice challenging. The primaryaim of this study was to assess the inter-rater reliability of afield based 1v1 agility test encompassing perceptual-actionperformance. A secondary aim was to assess the relationshipbetween the 1v1 agility tests with a range of physicalperformance tests including a commonly used Y step test.The third aim was to contrast the physical performance ofhigh performing players against lower performing playersin terms of agility action performance. Twenty-eight malerugby union players volunteered (age 19.3 ± 2.2 years, agerange 18-24, body mass 96.5 ± 13.3 kg). Participants wererandomly assigned to attack or defensive roles within a simulatedrugby evasion task (1v1 agility test). Previously utilizedperformance scoring (1) was modified to assess agilityperformance. Two independent investigators reviewedvideo recordings to score attacking and defensive performance.Cohens Kappa statistic showed inter-rater reliabilityof agility scoring to be almost perfect, 861 (CI 0.816 to0.917). Attacking agility had a large significant relationshipwith Y step performance (r = -0.577, p = 0.001), single legrepeat hop height (r = 0.570, p = 0.002) and body mass (r= -0.537, p = 0.003). Defensive agility outcome had a largesignificant relationship with CMJ flight time-contraction timeratio (r = 0.580, p = 0.001) and CMJ concentric duration (r =-0.656, p = 0.000). The Y step test shares 33{\%} of commonvariance with 1v1 attacking and 5{\%} with defensive agilityperformance likely due to significantly greater frontal andtransverse plane movement during agility compared to thechange of direction tests. We recommended the 1v1 agilitytest be included as part of physical profiling of team sportsplayers.",
keywords = "Change of direction, Athletic performance, Perceptual decision, making, Rehabilitation, Rugby union",
author = "David Drake and Rodney Kennedy and Jonny Davis and Matthew Godfrey and Simon McLeod and Amy Davis",
note = "Reference text: 1. Young WB, Murray MP (2017) Reliability of a Field Test of Defending and Attacking Agility in Australian Football and Relationships to Reactive Strength. J Strength Cond Res 31: 509-516. 2. Brughelli M, Cronin J, Levin G, Chaouachi A (2008) Understanding change of direction ability in sport: a review of resistance training studies. Sports Med 38: 1045-1063. 3. Brault S, Bideau B, Craig C, Kulpa R (2010) Balancing deceit and disguise: How to successfully fool the defender in a 1 vs. 1 situation in rugby. Hum Mov Sci 29: 412-425. 4. Brault S, Bideau B, Kulpa R, Craig CM (2012) Detecting deception in movement: the case of the side-step in rugby. PLoS One 7: e37494. 5. Wheeler KW, Sayers MGL (2011) Rugby Union Contact Skills Alter Evasive Agility Performance during Attacking Ball Carries. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching 6: 419-432. 6. Correia V, Ara{\'u}jo D, Cummins A, Craig CM (2012) Perceiving and acting upon spaces in a VR rugby task: expertise effects in affordance detection and task achievement. J Sport Exerc Psychol 34: 305-321. 7. Paul DJ, Gabbett TJ, Nassis GP (2016) Agility in Team Sports: Testing, Training and Factors Affecting Performance. Sports Med 46: 421-442. 8. Mann BJ, Ivey PA, Mayhew JL, Schumacher RM, Brechue WF (2016) Relationship between agility tests and short sprints: Reliability and smallest worthwhile difference in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division-I football players. J Strength Cond Res 30: 893-900. 9. Nimphius S, Callaghan SJ, Spiteri T, Lockie RG (2016) Change of Direction Deficit: A More Isolated Measure of Change of Direction Performance Than Total 505 Time. J Strength Cond Res 30: 3024-3032. 10. Sheppard JM, Young WB, Doyle TL, Sheppard TA, Newton RU (2006) An evaluation of a new test of reactive agility and its relationship to sprint speed and change of direction speed. J Sci Med Sport 9: 342-349. 11. Lockie RG, Schultz AB, McGann TS, Jalilvand F, Callaghan SJ (2015) Peak ankle muscle activity of faster and slower basketball players during the change of direction step in a reactive cutting task. J Athlet Enhancement 6: 17-20. 12. Hachana Y, Chaab{\`e}ne H, Nabli MA, Attia A, Moualhi J, et al. (2013) Test-Retest Reliability, Criterion-Related Validity, and Minimal Detectable Change of the Illinois Agility Test in Male Team Sport Athletes. J Strength Cond Res 27: 2752-2759. 13. Wheeler K, Sayers M (2009) Contact skills predicting tackle- breaks in Rugby Union. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching 4: 535-544. 14. Sclafani MP, Davis CC (2016) Return to play progression for rugby following injury to the lower extremity: a clinical commentary and review of the literature. Int J Sports Phys Ther 11: 302-320. 15. Reiman MP, Lorenz DS (2011) Integration of strength and conditioning principles into a rehabilitation program. Int J Sports Phys Ther 6: 241-253. 16. Spiteri T, Nimphius S, Hart NH, Specos C, Sheppard JM, et al. (2014) Contribution of strength characteristics to change of direction and agility performance in female basketball athletes. J Strength Cond Res 28: 2415-2423. 17. Green BS, Blake C, Caulfield BM (2011) A comparison of cutting technique performance in rugby union players. J Strength Cond Res 25: 2668-2680. 18. WMA (2013) World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 310: 2191-2194. 19. Maulder P, Cronin J (2005) Horizontal and vertical jump assessment: Reliability, symmetry, discriminative and predictive ability. Physical Therapy in Sport 6: 74-82. 20. Kennedy RA, Drake D (2017) Dissociated time course of recovery between strength and power after isoinertial resistance loading in rugby union players. J Strength Cond Res. 21. Jackson RC, Warren S, Abernethy B (2006) Anticipation skill and susceptibility to deceptive movement. Acta Psychol (Amst) 123: 355-371. 22. Hopkins WG (2002) A new view of statistics. 23. Viera AJ, Garrett JM (2005) Understanding interobserver agreement: The kappa statistic. Fam Med 37: 360-363. 24. Maloney SJ, Richards J, Nixon DG, Harvey LJ, Fletcher IM (2017) Do stiffness and asymmetries predict change of direction performance? J Sports Sci 35: 547-556. 25. Young WB, Miller IR, Talpey SW (2015) Physical qualities predict change-of-direction speed but not defensive agility in Australian rules football. J Strength Cond Res 29: 206- 212. 26. Hopkins WG, Marshall SW, Batterham AM, Hanin J (2009) Progressive statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise science. Med Sci Sports Exerc 41: 3-13. 27. Zifchock RA, Davis I, Higginson J, Royer T (2008) The symmetry angle: a novel, robust method of quantifying asymmetry. Gait Posture 27: 622-627. 28. Bishop C, Read P, Chavda S, Turner A (2016) A symmetries of the lower limb: The calculation conundrum in strength training and conditioning. Strength & Conditioning Journal 38: 27-32. 29. Hewit JK, Cronin JB, Hume PA (2012) Understanding change of direction performance: a technical analysis of a 180 aerial catch and turn task. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching 7: 503-514. 30. Mirsafaei Rizi R, Yeung SS, Stewart NJ, Yeung EW (2017) Risk factors that predict severe injuries in university rugby sevens players. J Sci Med Sport 20: 648-652. 31. Chalmers S, Magarey ME, Esterman A, Speechley M, Scase E, et al. (2013) The relationship between pre-season fitness testing and injury in elite junior Australian football players. J Sci Med Sport 16: 307-311. 32. Myer GD, Martin L, Ford KR, Paterno MV, Schmitt LC, et al. (2012) No association of time from surgery with functional deficits in athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: evidence for objective return-to-sport criteria. Am J Sports Med 40: 2256-2263. 33. Myer GD, Paterno MV, Ford KR, Quatman CE, Hewett TE (2006) Rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: criteria-based progression through the return-tosport phase. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 36: 385-402.",
year = "2017",
month = "11",
day = "23",
language = "English",
volume = "3 (6)",
pages = "1--7",

}

Drake, D, Kennedy, R, Davis, J, Godfrey, M, McLeod, S & Davis, A 2017, 'A Step towards a Field Based Agility Test in Team Sports', vol. 3 (6), pp. 1-7.

A Step towards a Field Based Agility Test in Team Sports. / Drake, David; Kennedy, Rodney; Davis, Jonny; Godfrey, Matthew; McLeod, Simon; Davis, Amy.

Vol. 3 (6), 23.11.2017, p. 1-7.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Step towards a Field Based Agility Test in Team Sports

AU - Drake, David

AU - Kennedy, Rodney

AU - Davis, Jonny

AU - Godfrey, Matthew

AU - McLeod, Simon

AU - Davis, Amy

N1 - Reference text: 1. Young WB, Murray MP (2017) Reliability of a Field Test of Defending and Attacking Agility in Australian Football and Relationships to Reactive Strength. J Strength Cond Res 31: 509-516. 2. Brughelli M, Cronin J, Levin G, Chaouachi A (2008) Understanding change of direction ability in sport: a review of resistance training studies. Sports Med 38: 1045-1063. 3. Brault S, Bideau B, Craig C, Kulpa R (2010) Balancing deceit and disguise: How to successfully fool the defender in a 1 vs. 1 situation in rugby. Hum Mov Sci 29: 412-425. 4. Brault S, Bideau B, Kulpa R, Craig CM (2012) Detecting deception in movement: the case of the side-step in rugby. PLoS One 7: e37494. 5. Wheeler KW, Sayers MGL (2011) Rugby Union Contact Skills Alter Evasive Agility Performance during Attacking Ball Carries. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching 6: 419-432. 6. Correia V, Araújo D, Cummins A, Craig CM (2012) Perceiving and acting upon spaces in a VR rugby task: expertise effects in affordance detection and task achievement. J Sport Exerc Psychol 34: 305-321. 7. Paul DJ, Gabbett TJ, Nassis GP (2016) Agility in Team Sports: Testing, Training and Factors Affecting Performance. Sports Med 46: 421-442. 8. Mann BJ, Ivey PA, Mayhew JL, Schumacher RM, Brechue WF (2016) Relationship between agility tests and short sprints: Reliability and smallest worthwhile difference in National Collegiate Athletic Association Division-I football players. J Strength Cond Res 30: 893-900. 9. Nimphius S, Callaghan SJ, Spiteri T, Lockie RG (2016) Change of Direction Deficit: A More Isolated Measure of Change of Direction Performance Than Total 505 Time. J Strength Cond Res 30: 3024-3032. 10. Sheppard JM, Young WB, Doyle TL, Sheppard TA, Newton RU (2006) An evaluation of a new test of reactive agility and its relationship to sprint speed and change of direction speed. J Sci Med Sport 9: 342-349. 11. Lockie RG, Schultz AB, McGann TS, Jalilvand F, Callaghan SJ (2015) Peak ankle muscle activity of faster and slower basketball players during the change of direction step in a reactive cutting task. J Athlet Enhancement 6: 17-20. 12. Hachana Y, Chaabène H, Nabli MA, Attia A, Moualhi J, et al. (2013) Test-Retest Reliability, Criterion-Related Validity, and Minimal Detectable Change of the Illinois Agility Test in Male Team Sport Athletes. J Strength Cond Res 27: 2752-2759. 13. Wheeler K, Sayers M (2009) Contact skills predicting tackle- breaks in Rugby Union. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching 4: 535-544. 14. Sclafani MP, Davis CC (2016) Return to play progression for rugby following injury to the lower extremity: a clinical commentary and review of the literature. Int J Sports Phys Ther 11: 302-320. 15. Reiman MP, Lorenz DS (2011) Integration of strength and conditioning principles into a rehabilitation program. Int J Sports Phys Ther 6: 241-253. 16. Spiteri T, Nimphius S, Hart NH, Specos C, Sheppard JM, et al. (2014) Contribution of strength characteristics to change of direction and agility performance in female basketball athletes. J Strength Cond Res 28: 2415-2423. 17. Green BS, Blake C, Caulfield BM (2011) A comparison of cutting technique performance in rugby union players. J Strength Cond Res 25: 2668-2680. 18. WMA (2013) World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA 310: 2191-2194. 19. Maulder P, Cronin J (2005) Horizontal and vertical jump assessment: Reliability, symmetry, discriminative and predictive ability. Physical Therapy in Sport 6: 74-82. 20. Kennedy RA, Drake D (2017) Dissociated time course of recovery between strength and power after isoinertial resistance loading in rugby union players. J Strength Cond Res. 21. Jackson RC, Warren S, Abernethy B (2006) Anticipation skill and susceptibility to deceptive movement. Acta Psychol (Amst) 123: 355-371. 22. Hopkins WG (2002) A new view of statistics. 23. Viera AJ, Garrett JM (2005) Understanding interobserver agreement: The kappa statistic. Fam Med 37: 360-363. 24. Maloney SJ, Richards J, Nixon DG, Harvey LJ, Fletcher IM (2017) Do stiffness and asymmetries predict change of direction performance? J Sports Sci 35: 547-556. 25. Young WB, Miller IR, Talpey SW (2015) Physical qualities predict change-of-direction speed but not defensive agility in Australian rules football. J Strength Cond Res 29: 206- 212. 26. Hopkins WG, Marshall SW, Batterham AM, Hanin J (2009) Progressive statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise science. Med Sci Sports Exerc 41: 3-13. 27. Zifchock RA, Davis I, Higginson J, Royer T (2008) The symmetry angle: a novel, robust method of quantifying asymmetry. Gait Posture 27: 622-627. 28. Bishop C, Read P, Chavda S, Turner A (2016) A symmetries of the lower limb: The calculation conundrum in strength training and conditioning. Strength & Conditioning Journal 38: 27-32. 29. Hewit JK, Cronin JB, Hume PA (2012) Understanding change of direction performance: a technical analysis of a 180 aerial catch and turn task. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching 7: 503-514. 30. Mirsafaei Rizi R, Yeung SS, Stewart NJ, Yeung EW (2017) Risk factors that predict severe injuries in university rugby sevens players. J Sci Med Sport 20: 648-652. 31. Chalmers S, Magarey ME, Esterman A, Speechley M, Scase E, et al. (2013) The relationship between pre-season fitness testing and injury in elite junior Australian football players. J Sci Med Sport 16: 307-311. 32. Myer GD, Martin L, Ford KR, Paterno MV, Schmitt LC, et al. (2012) No association of time from surgery with functional deficits in athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: evidence for objective return-to-sport criteria. Am J Sports Med 40: 2256-2263. 33. Myer GD, Paterno MV, Ford KR, Quatman CE, Hewett TE (2006) Rehabilitation after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: criteria-based progression through the return-tosport phase. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 36: 385-402.

PY - 2017/11/23

Y1 - 2017/11/23

N2 - Agility performance tests are limited by the requirement forforce plates, timing gates or expensive camera systemsmaking application into practice challenging. The primaryaim of this study was to assess the inter-rater reliability of afield based 1v1 agility test encompassing perceptual-actionperformance. A secondary aim was to assess the relationshipbetween the 1v1 agility tests with a range of physicalperformance tests including a commonly used Y step test.The third aim was to contrast the physical performance ofhigh performing players against lower performing playersin terms of agility action performance. Twenty-eight malerugby union players volunteered (age 19.3 ± 2.2 years, agerange 18-24, body mass 96.5 ± 13.3 kg). Participants wererandomly assigned to attack or defensive roles within a simulatedrugby evasion task (1v1 agility test). Previously utilizedperformance scoring (1) was modified to assess agilityperformance. Two independent investigators reviewedvideo recordings to score attacking and defensive performance.Cohens Kappa statistic showed inter-rater reliabilityof agility scoring to be almost perfect, 861 (CI 0.816 to0.917). Attacking agility had a large significant relationshipwith Y step performance (r = -0.577, p = 0.001), single legrepeat hop height (r = 0.570, p = 0.002) and body mass (r= -0.537, p = 0.003). Defensive agility outcome had a largesignificant relationship with CMJ flight time-contraction timeratio (r = 0.580, p = 0.001) and CMJ concentric duration (r =-0.656, p = 0.000). The Y step test shares 33% of commonvariance with 1v1 attacking and 5% with defensive agilityperformance likely due to significantly greater frontal andtransverse plane movement during agility compared to thechange of direction tests. We recommended the 1v1 agilitytest be included as part of physical profiling of team sportsplayers.

AB - Agility performance tests are limited by the requirement forforce plates, timing gates or expensive camera systemsmaking application into practice challenging. The primaryaim of this study was to assess the inter-rater reliability of afield based 1v1 agility test encompassing perceptual-actionperformance. A secondary aim was to assess the relationshipbetween the 1v1 agility tests with a range of physicalperformance tests including a commonly used Y step test.The third aim was to contrast the physical performance ofhigh performing players against lower performing playersin terms of agility action performance. Twenty-eight malerugby union players volunteered (age 19.3 ± 2.2 years, agerange 18-24, body mass 96.5 ± 13.3 kg). Participants wererandomly assigned to attack or defensive roles within a simulatedrugby evasion task (1v1 agility test). Previously utilizedperformance scoring (1) was modified to assess agilityperformance. Two independent investigators reviewedvideo recordings to score attacking and defensive performance.Cohens Kappa statistic showed inter-rater reliabilityof agility scoring to be almost perfect, 861 (CI 0.816 to0.917). Attacking agility had a large significant relationshipwith Y step performance (r = -0.577, p = 0.001), single legrepeat hop height (r = 0.570, p = 0.002) and body mass (r= -0.537, p = 0.003). Defensive agility outcome had a largesignificant relationship with CMJ flight time-contraction timeratio (r = 0.580, p = 0.001) and CMJ concentric duration (r =-0.656, p = 0.000). The Y step test shares 33% of commonvariance with 1v1 attacking and 5% with defensive agilityperformance likely due to significantly greater frontal andtransverse plane movement during agility compared to thechange of direction tests. We recommended the 1v1 agilitytest be included as part of physical profiling of team sportsplayers.

KW - Change of direction

KW - Athletic performance

KW - Perceptual decision

KW - making

KW - Rehabilitation

KW - Rugby union

M3 - Article

VL - 3 (6)

SP - 1

EP - 7

ER -

Drake D, Kennedy R, Davis J, Godfrey M, McLeod S, Davis A. A Step towards a Field Based Agility Test in Team Sports. 2017 Nov 23;3 (6):1-7.