Teaching and Learning Team Sports and Games

Jean-Francis Gréhaigne, Jean-François Richard, Linda L. Griffin, Jean-Francis Gréhaigne, Jean-François Richard, Linda L. Griffin

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2012
• ISBN:
  9781136075223
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

Written as a resource for both pre-service and in-service educators, this theory-to-practice book focuses on the foundations and applications of constructivism applied to the teaching and learning of invasion sports and games.

I

Performance in Team Sports

1

CLASSIFYING, DEFINING, AND ANALYZING TEAM SPORTS AND GAMES

In this first chapter, we provide an overview of a classification system for games. We will specifically focus on team sports that are classified as invasion games and present different models for analyzing game play.

THE CLASSIFICATION OF SPORTS AND GAMES

Logic, tactics, and practice are three notions that involve two associated ideas: a) the reality concerning game play is intelligible; and b) the intervention in relation to this reality can be the subject of objective, rational inquiry. As several authors have stated, game play is essentially a player's personal property (ownership) (Deleplace, 1995; Wade, 1970). This idea emphasizes that through time, players have had a major influence on the evolution of game play because they are the ones actually applying game play concepts in practical contexts. Coaches, referees, and rules of play are also factors that influence game play.

Through time, the dynamics of game play and the essence of team sports and games prompt players to better use the potentialities reflected in the spirit of fundamental rules (Deleplace, 1966) or primary rules (Almond, 1986a). Deleplace (1979) considers that the traditional technical analysis model must be contextualized within actual game situations in which a “force ratio” between opponents is present. Hence, this tactical analysis model's primary function is to identify the different possible game configurations within this force ratio and also to identify the pertinent indices that characterize them. Second, this model consists of extracting the principles that lead to a configuration's transformation. The extraction of these principles permits one access to the internal logic of a particular sport or game. This internal logic is the product of the game's continuous interaction between the game's main rules and the changing game responses produced by players.

The fundamental or primary rules are concerned with the means to an end, and to achieve the end by other means is not playing the game. Thus, primary rules supply the game with its essential character. Primary rules are what makes basketball, “basketball” not volleyball (Almond, 1986a).

Fundamental rules have a major influence on the relationship between opponents because they determine certain parameters in which players must function. A particular game or sport is organized around a nucleus of fundamental and complementary rules that evolve to try and adapt to the changes introduced by new techniques and tactics while still conserving the essence or “spirit” of that particular game or sport. These fundamental or primary rules are characterized by:

•The modalities of scoring, which relate to the particular characteristics of the game's target and the necessary skills involved in order to score.

•The players’ rights (both from an offensive and defensive standpoint), which are based upon the modalities of scoring that complete those rights with respect to the equality of chances.

•The liberty of action that players have with the ball to give the game a specific character.

•The modalities of physical engagement that ensure the respect of the three previous rules.

The knowledge of rules within their specific logic is necessary to better understand the logic of observed game play behaviors, both technical and tactical. According to Almond in the book Rethinking Teaching Games (1986b), games can be classified in the following four categories: invasion, fielding/runscoring, net/wall, and target games.

For his part, Gréhaigne (1989) adds another dimension to the classification of invasion games. He specifies that the target in invasion games can greatly influence their particular characteristics. Typically, targets can be vertical or horizontal, big or small, high or low, and within the playing area or at its extremity. These characteristics can have different effects on the technical and tactical components of the game. He adds that games can also be characterized by being played either on a bigger or smaller playing surface. Finally, Gréhaigne mentions that the way players interact with the projectile can also define games. The interaction is a factor that either reunites or separates opponents as they fight to gain possession of the projectile.

Invasion Games
1. Handball	American football	Stick-ball
Basketball	Soccer	Field hockey
Netball	Rugby	Lacrosse
Team handball	Gaelic football	Cycle polo
Korkball	Australian football	Shinty
Tchouk-ball	Hurling/Camogie	Roller hockey
Ultimate frisbee	Speedball	Ice hockey
Waterpolo	Touchball (Finnish rugby)
2. Games can have:
a) either a focused target, like hockey.
b) or an open-ended target, like football.
Fielding/Runscoring
Baseball
Softball
Rounders
Cricket
Kick Ball (football cricket)
Net/Wall
Net/Racquet	Net/hand	Wall
Badminton	Volleyball	Squash
Tennis		Handball (court)
Table Tennis		Paddle Ball
Paddle Tennis		Raquetball
Platform Tennis		Basque pelote
Target Games
Golf	Ten (or 5 or 9) Pin
Croquet	Duckpin
Curling	Pub skittles
Pool	Billiards
	Snooker

THE NATURE AND DEFINITION OF TEAM SPORTS

Figure 1.1 illustrates the continuous and fundamentally reversible character of play. In a natural sequence of events in any invasion game, players are either defenders or attackers in connection with the configurations of play. One can note that we differenciate between the notions of “attack” and “offense”. The offensive aspect of the attack is scoring or taking a shot on a goal. Conservation of the ball is the defensive aspect of the attack, especially when the ball circulates at the rear of the effective play-space. Recovering the ball or putting pressure on the opposing team to regain possession of the ball is the offensive aspect of the defense. Defending one's goal consists in the defensive aspect of the defense. We have already moved from a simple attack-defense model to a more complex model with the use of offensive and defensive notions.

Fig. 1.1 Concepts related to the notion of opposition (translation from Gréhaigne, 1989).

As we examine a little closer, team sports offer certain closely interwoven characteristics within a given set of rules, focused toward winning the match (Gréhaigne, 1989, 1992; Gréhaigne & Godbout, 1995). These characteristics are:

•A force ratio. A group of players confronts another group of players, fighting for or exchanging an object (most often a ball)

•A choice of motor skills. Mastery of a certain range of motor responses—those of daily life or others that are much more specific and elaborate

•Individual and collective strategies. Implicit or explicit decisions, taken by the group, on the basis of a common frame of reference to defeat the opponents

The emphasis put on the inseparable character of the relationship among these three elements has consequences on the way one approaches or patterns team sports (Gréhaigne, 1994). The main challenge of team sports according to Deleplace (1979) is that in an opposition relationship, each of two teams must coordinate its actions to recover, conserve, and move the ball so as to bring it into the scoring zone and score.

Team sports are defined by Gréhaigne & Roche (1990) as the self-organization of a group confronted by another group with antagonistic interests. To score and prevent scoring players use common strategies:

1.To resolve anticipation-coincidence motor problems, that is, the preparation of responses before the arrival of the ball and the regulation of these responses as the ball arrives

2.To make informed choices among potential answers depending upon likely costs and benefits

3.To manage the varying courses of the players and the trajectories of the ball in urgent conditions of decision making

Brackenridge (1979) proposes a struggle for territorial dominance within a set of rules or structural parameters that includes significant cognition and technical aspects and in which coincidence-anticipation is paramount. The struggle for territorial dominance is decided by a system of scoring, which determines victory. The code of rules identifies the problems surrounding the achievement of territorial dominance and ensures that both teams or individuals meet and compete on equal and fair grounds. Gréhaigne (1992) indicates that this way of viewing team sports brings in three main categories of problems:

•Problems related to space and time. In an attack situation, one must find solutions to problems of individual and collective handling of the ball to overtake, use, or avoid varying mobile obstacles. In a defense mode, one must bring forward obstacles to slow down or stop the forward progression of the ball and of the opponents in view of an eventual recapture of the ball.

•Problems related to information. Players must also deal with problems related to the production of uncertainty for the opponents and of certainty for their partners in a situation that remains fundamentally reversible. The reduction of uncertainty for the team in possession of the ball is a function of the quality of the communication codes and the choice of explicit tactics, thus allowing appropriate choices, understood by all teammates, according to momentary configurations of play.

• Problems related to organization. Players must accept the switch from an individual to a collective project. Each player must truly merge the collective project with their personal actions while giving the best of themselves to the group.

Generally, in team sports the main organization for a team is its “system of play.” It is defined as

“The general form in which players’ offensive and defensive actions are organized by establishing a precise arrangement of certains tasks in relation to positions and field coverage and certain principles of cooperation among them. The system of play is the basic structure of collective team tactics.” (Teodorescu, 1965)

In the following section, we will share different game play analysis models with the goal of situating the conceptions and limitations related to teaching team sports and games.

GAME PLAY ANALYSIS MODELS

In this section, we present three different analysis models based on two reference frameworks: one based on pedagogical conceptions and the other based on the learner's conceptions.

Analytical Model

Traditional conceptions of a team's strength hold that it is equal to the sum of the individuals that make it up. We juxtapose quality individuals to make up a team. Game play is decomposed into simple elements that, when combined with quality players, result in a quality or high performance.

Pedagogical Conceptions of the Analytical Model The analytical model is heavily influenced by rational and mechanical theories. This approach analyzes game components (technical skills) outside the actual game context. Game components that are decomposed and analyzed individually are then associated with each other. Within this approach, which is based on a behavioral teaching approach, a major importance is attributed to imitation and repetition. However, it has often been noted that imitation and repetition is accomplished in a near-total absence of creative or critical thinking.

Structuralist Model

In contrast to the previous model, the team is perceived to be more than the sum of the individuals who compose it. The team is seen as a structured group of individuals or a “social microsystem” working together toward a common goal (Teodorescu, 1965). Within this microsystem, there exists a reciprocal coordination of individual and collective actions from which the group tries to draw general principles to better understand the game.

Pedagogical Conceptions of the Stucturalist Model The structurali...