Physical testing characteristics better explain draft outcome than in-game movement profile in junior elite Australian rules football players

Article

Jennings, Jacob, Wundersitz, Daniel W., Sullivan, Courtney J., Cousins, Stephen D., Tehan, Gerry and Kingsley, Michael I.. 2021. "Physical testing characteristics better explain draft outcome than in-game movement profile in junior elite Australian rules football players." Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport. 24 (12), pp. 1284-1289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2021.07.005
Article Title

Physical testing characteristics better explain draft outcome than in-game movement profile in junior elite Australian rules football players

ERA Journal ID9776
Article CategoryArticle
AuthorsJennings, Jacob, Wundersitz, Daniel W., Sullivan, Courtney J., Cousins, Stephen D., Tehan, Gerry and Kingsley, Michael I.
Journal TitleJournal of Science and Medicine in Sport
Journal Citation24 (12), pp. 1284-1289
Number of Pages6
Year2021
PublisherElsevier
Place of PublicationAustralia
ISSN1440-2440
1878-1861
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2021.07.005
Web Address (URL)https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1440244021001821
Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the extent to which Australian Football League (AFL) draft outcome is associated with physical performance and/or in-game movement profile.

Design: Observational cohort design.

Methods: Physical testing results and in-game global positioning system (GPS) data were collated from Victorian-based, draft-eligible participants in the under 18 boys NAB League competition (n = 450; age = 17.1 ± 0.3 y). Players were grouped by position as nomadic, fixed-position or fixed&ruck.

Results: Individually, variables that best distinguish drafted and non-drafted players were: estimated V̇O2 max (all-position, nomadic, fixed&ruck: d = 0.60, 0.64, 0.53), standing vertical jump (d = 0.57, 0.58, 0.53), running vertical jump (d = 0.52, 0.51, 0.56), AFL agility (d = 0.49, 0.44, 0.67) and 20-m speed (all-position, nomadic: d = 0.50, 0.61). Factor analysis prior to binary logistic regression assessed the probability of factors influencing position-specific draft outcome. AFL agility (all-position, fixed&ruck: OR = 4.58, 15.86), anthropometry (all-position, nomadic, fixed, fixed&ruck: OR = 2.55, 2.06, 11.41, 7.99), and jumping (all-position, nomadic, fixed&ruck: OR = 1.75, 1.69, 2.68) were the factors most associated with positive draft outcome. More game involvement (fixed&ruck: OR = 2.22), sprinting (all-position, fixed&ruck: OR = 1.45, 2.06) and less non-sprinting activities (all-position, nomadic: OR = 0.64, 0.61) were associated with positive draft outcome. The fixed&ruck model was the best performing (χ2(115) = 30.59, p < 0.001, AUC = 84.7%).

Conclusions: Physical testing-related factors were most likely to influence draft outcome, where larger and more agile players were desirable draft picks. In-game movement profile had some bearing on draft outcome in all positional groups with the exception of fixed.

KeywordsTalent identification; Team sports; Selection; Performance; Draft
Contains Sensitive ContentDoes not contain sensitive content
ANZSRC Field of Research 2020420799. Sports science and exercise not elsewhere classified
Public Notes

Files associated with this item cannot be displayed due to copyright restrictions.

Byline AffiliationsLa Trobe University
School of Psychology and Wellbeing
University of Auckland, New Zealand
Permalink -

https://research.usq.edu.au/item/zq508/physical-testing-characteristics-better-explain-draft-outcome-than-in-game-movement-profile-in-junior-elite-australian-rules-football-players

Log in to edit
  • 4
    total views
  • 0
    total downloads
  • 4
    views this month
  • 0
    downloads this month

Export as