Team handball is a complex sport game that is determined by the individual performance of each player as well as tactical components and interaction of the team. The aim of this review was to specify the elements of team-handball performance based on scientific studies and practical experience, and to convey perspectives for practical implication.
Scientific studies were identified via data bases of PubMed, Web of Knowledge, SPORT Discus, Google Scholar, and Hercules. A total of 56 articles met the inclusion criteria. In addition, we supplemented the review with 13 additional articles, proceedings and book sections. It was found that the specific characteristics of team-handball with frequent intensity changes, team-handball techniques, hard body confrontations, mental skills and social factors specify the determinants of coordination, endurance, strength and cognition. Although we found comprehensive studies examining individual performance in team-handball players of different experience level, sex or age, there is a lack of studies, particularly for team-handball specific training, as well as cognition and social factors. Introduction Team-handball is an Olympic sport ball game that is characterized by fast pace defensive and offensive action during the game with the objective of the game to score goals.
So, how and where does game sense (method of. All games will be small-sided modified games, and relate to: Netball, Basketball and Team Handball. Handball stories, news and interviews; exclusive information from the European Handball.
To score goals, the offensive players (6 players and one goalie) attempt to establish an optimal position for the throwing player by fast movements over short distances performing powerful changes in direction (with and without the ball), one-on-one action against defensive players and passing the ball using different offensive tactics. To describe team-handball play, especially to determine factors that influence performance is difficult because team-handball play is complex and multi-factorial. Team-handball players have to coordinate their movements well for running, jumping, pushing, change of direction and team-handball specific movements of passing, catching, throwing, checking and blocking.
Intensities during the game always change between standing and walking, jogging and moderate running, sprinting and fast forward, sideward, and backward movements (Michalsik et al.,; Povoas et al., ), therefore, a specific high level of endurance is important to keep up a high level of play during the entire game (2×30min). However, team-handball is strongly influenced by the tactical concepts, social factors as well as cognitive aspects. Finally, as in other team sports nutrition, illness and injuries as well as external influences of materials and environmental conditions could influence the performance in team-handball.
Determinants of team-handball performance. Determining the factors that influence performance in team-handball based on scientific studies should contribute to the increase in quality of training for coaches and practitioners as well as to develop specific measuring methods and tests from scientific studies. Different tactical components in team-handball offense and defense are well described in team-handball specific journals and well documented by the European (EHF) and International Handball Federation (IHF). The homepages of the EHF and IHF have published detailed statistics for every final round for the last 10-15 years of World, Olympic and European Championships as well as the EHF Champions League. In this context it have to be known that the game analyses of the IHF and EHF is not peer-reviewed and therefore these data should not be used for scientific studies. Since nutrition for team-handball is very similar to other team sports and injuries in team-handball are well documented, we limited this review to the influence of coordination, strength, endurance, constitution, social factors and cognition to the performance in team-handball. The aim of this review was threefold: (1) summarize the most important findings of different scientific studies, (2) define the determinants of team-handball performance based on these studies, and (3) provide perspectives for practical implication.
Literature search methodology We searched the following computer databases: PubMed, Web of Knowledge, SPORT Discus, Google Scholar, and Hercules. The search terms used to identify the studies were handball (some studies used handball instead of team-handball) in combination with test, training, throw and/or shot, jump, sprint, coordination, agility, strength, power, endurance, change of direction, shuttle run, cognition, mental skills, personality, social factors and/or group coherence. The word searches were specifically adjusted to each database for free text words and categorized free terms.
In the first step, language was limited to English. At the beginning of the season 2001/2002, a change in the rules (fast throw on) in team-handball altered the characteristics and fundamentally changed the game. Therefore, this search was limited to January 2002 through December 2013.
Additionally, we manually searched the references of published studies. If we were not able to find a minimum of five studies in each category, we extended the search to older investigations (prior to 2002), studies in other team sport games or studies published in the German language. This was especially true for cognition and social factors.
In this context, we used specific electronic databases of the institute of sport science i.e. BISp, SPOLIT and SPONET. Inclusion criteria Studies detected in initial searches were screened using the following inclusion criteria: (1) using elite or experienced team-handball players as subjects, (2) analyzing performance that were similar to competition, (3) full length texts had to be available, (4) if similar tests or analyses were used in several studies we used only those studies that were close to the first two inclusion criteria, and (5) total numbers of studies per sub-category were limited to seven studies. Pelvis and trunk rotation, shoulder internal rotation and elbow extension angular velocity during jump throw (A), percentage of throwing types (B) and shot distribution (C) during competition, and percentage of ball velocity in different throwing techniques (D). Throwing in team-handball has to be always considered under tactical considerations. Although, the standing throw with run-up is the throwing technique with the highest ball velocity (ball velocity is the main performance variable in team-handball) the jump throw is the most often applied throwing technique (75%, ) in team-handball (Wagner et al., ).
The advantage of this throwing technique is that it enables a better throwing position (wing players and pivots, fast break, brake through), throwing over the rival block (backcourt players) and more time for decision making (throwing or passing, throwing direction, watching the goalkeeper). Another tactical consideration in team-handball throwing is that most throws (50% in the Olympic team-handball tournament in Bejing 2012) were placed in the lower corners of the goal.
Throwing to the lower corners of the goal enables a higher ball velocity and accuracy (longer arm acceleration and ball control) and a higher success rate. For the goalkeeper, it is more difficult to make saves with the legs compared to throwing to the upper corners of the goal. Jump height is important for the jump throw in team-handball to reach a high vertical position to throw over the block of the rival defensive players when throwing from backcourt position or to have more time for throwing (an increase in flight time) to mimic or to react to the movements of the goalkeeper.
On defense, jump height is important to block the rival offensive player when throwing. Jump heights in team-handball were often measured during a counter movement jump; however, no significant differences were found between elite and amateur male (Gorostiaga et al., ) and female (Granados et al., ) players. Michalsik et al. measured the jump height during a counter movement jump (43.9 ± 6.0 cm) and a jump and reach test including a run-up (71.4 ± 7.8 cm) in Danish elite team-handball players and found to be significantly increased in the jump with run-up. That the type of jump could influence throwing performance was shown by Pori et al.
Upper body kinematics and ball velocity in the jump throw were different when throwing with take-off from one (leg from or opposite from the throwing arm) or two legs, while throwing with take-off from one leg opposite to the throwing arm enables the highest ball velocity (Wagner et al., ). It is well known from practice and training that sprints are often used to increase performance in team ball sport games. Sprinting performance is easily measurable by different sprint tests utilizing standard time measuring equipment.
analyzed the specificity of sprint and agility training methods and found a significant increase in performance after a six week training session in experienced team sport athletes. The more interesting finding of this study was that the sprint training group (20-40 m sprints) increased their performance in the straight sprinting test (30 m) but less in the agility tests (direction changes) and vice versa. suggested that straight sprint and agility training methods are specific and produce only limited transfer from one to the other. Testing straight sprinting performance in team-handball Gorostiaga et al. found no significant differences in the running time for 5 and 15 m between elite and amateur players. However, when including change in direction in a sprinting test (2×12.5 m shuttle sprints) Buchheit et al.
found that the sprinting time was influenced by age, sex and skill level in team-handball players. Movements in team-handball are characterized mostly by short accelerations (0-3 m) with stops (30-40 per game) and changes in direction (30-40 per game) and less by sprints (10-30 m) over the entire game field (Michalsik et al.,;; Povoas et al., ), constituting only 1-3% of the total playing time per match were attributed to sprints or fast running. Tests including changes in direction might be more suitable to measure team-handball performance, although learning effects could influence the results (especially in training studies) and these tests could not resemble the real demands in team-handball competition.
Straight sprinting is not often used in team-handball competition but could also strongly influence the result of the game because it is important in the fast break. Therefore, Wagner et al. developed and validated a game based performance test that is suitable to measure team-handball specific agility (typical movements in offence and defense) and sprinting performance (fast break and running back). It was shown that the test is valid and reliable but results about differences in sex, age and experience level are lacking. We conclude that coordination is a main determinant in team-handball to optimize throwing performance (proximal-to-distal sequencing, upper body rotation, adaptations to different situations), jumping performance (block, jump throw, with one or two legs, with or without run-up) and specific agility (in offence and defense, short accelerations, changes in direction). Strength and power Gorostiaga et al.
investigated power and strength of Spanish elite and amateur team-handball players and found that the elite players have a higher one-repetition maximum (1RM BP) in the bench-press (+22%), a higher average power output of the upper extremities (+20%) and a higher average power output in half-squat (+16%) compared to amateur players. A positive correlation was found between ball velocity in the 3-step running throw and concentric velocity production at a load of 30% of 1RM BP (r = 0.72) as well as concentric power production during half-squat action (r = 0.62). A positive influence of strength and power on ball velocity in the team-handball throw was also found in several studies (Chelly et al.,; Debanne and Laffaye,; Granados et al.,; Marques et al., ). Gorostiaga et al. suggested that higher values of maximal strength and muscle power would give a clear advantage to sustain the forceful muscle contractions during team-handball specific movements. Strength and power training is therefore important to improve performance in team-handball. To increase strength and power, different dynamic strength and power exercise over training periods between 6 and 12 weeks were employed in several training studies (Gorostiaga et al.,; Hermassi et al.,; Marques and Gonzalez-Badillo,; Marques et al., ).
Thorlund et al. examined acute fatigue-induced changes in muscle mechanical properties and neuromuscular activity in elite team-handball players following a simulated team-handball game and found a significant decrease in single-joint isometric muscle strength and power from pre to post test. Michalsik and Aagaard analyzed the physical demands in elite male and female and Michalsik et al. the technical match characteristics in elite male team-handball players. They found sex and position specific differences in performing fast breaks (more sprints for wing players), physical confrontations (more for backcourt players and pivots), strength related actions and high intensity running (more for male players) as well as relative work load in competition (more for female players). We therefore recommend that upper and lower limb strength and power are important to increase performance in the team-handball specific movements as well as to prevent a decrease in performance in the later stages during a team-handball game.
To optimize team-handball specific strength and power training different demands in sex and playing position have to be considered (Michalsik and Aagaard,; Michalsik et al., ). Endurance Endurance of team-handball players was determined by measuring blood lactate concentration (BLC) during endurance running (Gorostiaga et al.,;; Ramadan et al., ), maximal oxygen consumption (VO 2max) during an incremental treadmill running test (Buchheit et al.,; Buchheit et al.,; Michalsik et al.,;; Wagner et al., ) or VO 2max, BLC, heart rate (HR) and other variables during specific shuttle runs or sprint tests (Buchheit,; Buchheit et al.,;;;;;; Wagner et al., ).
Gorostiaga et al. measured BLC of Spanish elite and amateur male team-handball players immediately after a four-stage (10, 12, 14, 16 km.h -1) submaximal discontinuous progressive test on the team-handball court and found no significant difference in the mean BLC between the two groups.
Gorostiaga et al. suggested that endurance capacity does not represent a limitation for performance in team-handball. Comparing different studies that measured VO 2max during an incremental treadmill running test (Buchheit et al.,;; Michalsik et al.,; Rannou et al., ) it was found that the VO 2max ranged between 55 and 60 mlkg -1min -1 for elite and experienced team-handball players. Because of the relatively constant value of the VO 2max in elite and experienced team-handball players, we assert that the VO 2max during an incremental treadmill-running test should be higher than 55 mlkg -1min -1. Buchheit et al.
measured BLC and VO 2max during an incremental treadmill running test, a shuttle run (15s exercise – 15s passive recovery) and a team-handball small size game. It was reported that the VO 2max was highest in the small size game (60.2 ± 2.6 mlkg -1min -1) compared to the shuttle run (56.4 ± 5.2 mlkg -1min -1) and incremental treadmill-running test (57.3 ± 4.7 mlkg -1min -1).
BLCpeak was highest in the shuttle run (11.6 ± 1.4 mmoll -1) compared to the small size game (8.9 ± 2.3 mmoll -1) and incremental treadmill-running test (9.3 ± 1.3 mmoll -1). Buchheit et al.
found that running tests are not relevant for an accurate estimate of maximal cardiorespiratory fitness in team-handball players because the specific movements in team-handball are widely different from running. A limitation of these studies was that these variables were measured under standardized conditions that do not or only minimal reflect the demands in a real team-handball game. Consequently several studies (Michalsik and Aagaard,; Michalsik et al.,;;;; Povoas et al., ) evaluated the physiological capacity and physical demands during match-play using heart-rate (HR) monitors and computerized locomotive and technical match analysis.
There was found a relative workload of 65-80% of VO 2max, a total distance per match of 3900-4700m, a mean HR of 160-170 beatsmin -1, a high number of activity changes (600-1500 per match) and a post-match BLC of 3-11 mmoll -1. However, these physiological parameters differ significantly between male and female players as well as between wing players, backcourt players and pivots. A limitation of these studies was that aerobic capacity was evaluated only indirect by calculating the relative workload (percentage of VO 2max HR). To our best knowledge only Wagner et al.
analyzed VO 2, BLC and HR under conditions similar to competition. In their valid and reliable game based performance test they found a VO 2peak of 54.4 ± 6.2 mlkg -1min -1 and a BLCpeak of 10.9 ± 3.0 mmoll -1 in experienced male team-handball players. Consequently we conclude that during competition team-handball players need a high aerobic capacity to regenerate during the low intensity phases to ensure playing on a high level in the high intensity phases (VO 2max of 55-60 mlkg -1min -1; BLCpeak 8-12 mmoll -1) during the entire game (2 × 30 min). Test Reference Results: HRpeak (beatmin -1) BLCpeak (mmoll -1) VO2max (mmoll -1kg -1) Repeated sprints with directional changes Buchheit et al. 0°: 184±7, 10.1±2.2, n.r.
45°: 181±8, 8.0±2.3, n.r. 90°: 178±9, 6.1±2.5, n.r. 135°: 180±8, 7.4±2.3, n.r.
30-15 intermittent fitness test (IFT), repeated sprints with (RSS) or without (RS) shuttle runs Buchheit et al. IFT: 184±9, -, 50.2±7.4 RSS: 174, 9.3±2.4, 38.9±3.8 RS: 174, 10.0±1.7, 40.4±4.2 30-15 intermittent fitness test (IFT) and continuous graded test (CT) Buchheit et al. IFT: 195±8, 11.8±2.3, 54.5±6.6 CT: 193±10, 8.9±2.1, 53.3±7.3 Small size game (HB), high intensity intermittent run (IE) and incremental treadmill running test (IR) Buchheit et al. HB: 187±7, 8.9±2.3, 60.2±2.6 IE: 189±5, 11.6±1.4, 56.4±5.2 IR: 190±8, 9.3±1.3, 57.3±4.7 Endurance running with constant running speed Gorostiaga et al. 10km/h: 140±8, 1.8±0.5, n.r. 12km/h: 158±7, 3.2±1.1, n.r. 14km/h: 172±6, 7.2±2.0, n.r.
Team-handball game performance (HB) and incremental treadmill running test (IR) Michalsik et al. HB:163±8, 2.8-10.8, 71±6% VO2max IR: n.r., 10.5±2.9, 57.0±4.1 Team-handball game performance (HB) and incremental treadmill running test (IR) Povoas et al. HB: 157±18, n.r., 82±9% VO2max IR: 191±8, 55.3±4.6, n.r. Team-handball game (HB), game based test (GBT) and incremental treadmill running test (IR) Wagner et al. HB: 182±7, 5.8±2.2, n.r. GBT: 184±11, 11.6±3.0, 54.8±5.6 IR: 190±8, n.r., 54.5±5.3.
Constitution Comparing elite and less experienced team-handball players, it was reported that elite players were taller and heavier compared to less experienced players (Bayios et al.,; Gorostiaga et al.,; Wagner et al., ). Measuring the fat-free mass, Gorostiaga et al.
found that Spanish elite players have a higher (81.7 ± 9.0 kg) fat-free mass compared to amateur players (72.4 ± 7.0 kg). In the team-handball game, body height is important for throwing in offense or blocking in defense and high body mass was important during one-on-one actions.
Wagner et al. demonstrated that taller team-handball players with a greater body mass have the ability to achieve a higher ball velocity in the jump throw. Van den Tillaar and Ettema suggested that body size have a strong positive effect on the throwing performance and isometric strength. However, Michalsik et al. found that the physical characteristics depend also on the playing position.
Wing players are smaller and weight less (184.9 ± 5.7 cm; 84.5 ± 5.8 kg) compared to pivot players (194.8 ± 3.6 cm; 99.4 ± 6.2 kg) and/or backcourt players (191.9 ± 5.4 cm; 94.7 ± 7.1 kg). Similar results were also found by Sporis et al. in elite Croatian team-handball players.
Cognition Cognitive aspects such as attention, anticipation, decision making and executive functioning have to be considered as important psychological determinants of team-handball performance. Revealing insights exist in decision making (Johnson and Raab,; Raab and Johnson,; Raab and Laborde, ) and attention processes (Memmert et al., ) in team-handball.
However, we decided to focus in this review on mental skills and personality of team-handball players. Mental skills such as concentration, anxiety management, self-confidence, mental preparation, motivation, etc., are well accepted and used to develop (Mahoney et al.,; Thomas et al., ) and utilize questionnaires in different sports.
Gonzales et al. examined the assessment of psychological skills in young elite female team-handball players and found a significant difference in mental skills depending on the experience (years of competition). However, there were two approaches pursued to identify relevant psychological state and trait variables related to high team-handball performance. One approach was to analyze the sport-specific challenges a team-handball player has to cope with in practice and during competition.
Silva and Wegner and Dawo formulated team-handball specific mental skills that are related to elite performance:. High amount of court sense. During competition a team-handball player has to know who is where-doing what (Silva, ). Game intelligence expresses a big part the factor of court sense. But it includes also aspects of working memory, anticipation, decision making, etc. The second approach is to find out important psychological variables by the determination of differences of experts and near-experts.
Christoforidis et al. investigated anger and aggressiveness of male and female team-handball players with different game expertise. Male players exhibit their aggressiveness during a handball game significantly more often compared to female players. Analysis of game experience level revealed the most experienced players acquired significantly higher aggressiveness scores followed by intermediate and inexperienced players. The concept of self-efficacy in team-handball was addressed by Wilhelm et al.
They developed a team-handball specific self-efficacy inventory (HASI) that assesses the perceived efficacy in individual-tactical and team-tactical performance. By using the HASI, they demonstrated that elite athletes achieve a higher perceived individual sport-game specific self-efficacy than other athletes. Rogulj et al. investigated differences in personality between team-handball players of differing expertise.
Using the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ), they have demonstrated that efficient compared to less efficient team-handball players have attained lower values in dissimulation (EPQ-L-scale). Differences between successful and less successful handball goalkeepers were analyzed by Kajtna et al. Fluid intelligence, trait anxiety, trait aggression as well as simple reaction time were not related to high performance in team-handball goalkeepers.
Geukes et al. have shown that team-handball players of high narcissistic values performed better in team-handball aiming task under pressure compared to players with lower values induced by the audience between 1500 and 2000 spectators. In a low pressure condition (no audience), the trait of narcissism had no impact on performance.
Game Sense. 1. Game Sense Teaching Approach Renee White. Game Sense.
Game Sense challenges the traditional methods coaching. This new approach, game sense, was first introduced into Australian Sports and Health facilities in the mid 1990’s (Pill, 2011). The Games Sense teaching and coaching is very similar to the pedagogy Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU). Both approaches place the belief that the learning and development of a sport or skills associated with a sport is made through the practicing and playing of modified games of a particular or selected sport (Light, 2013).
In addition to the teaching through modified games questioning is used. These two elements cause the student to be at the center of their own learning. Game Sense is player centered (Light, 2013). Games Sense teaches students that learning a sport or skill is not just about learning the physical aspects and particular movement, rather it teaches the student that sports and physical education also requires conceptual awareness and decision making (Pill, 2011).
Game Sense. As recognises games sense and TGfU is a contemporary and alternative approach to the traditional coaching and teaching of physical education and sports.
Unlike the tradition approach where the analysis of skills is placed on techniques, Game Sense is does not place significance on the physical skills. Rather tactical understanding and decision making is also deemed to be important (Light, 2004). There are two approached that can be implementing to teach this games sense style. – The first practice, the small sided approach involves playing games that gradually build the amount of players, eg. 1 vs1, 1 vs 2, 2 vs 2 ect.
The small sided approach takes into account training regarding play and practice, designers games and smart challenges. – The second type of game sense application is known as the mid size approach. This form of application starts with a minimal number or players and rules and as the players understanding develops the complexity of the game is gradually built. The graduation of complexity is a result of further rules, concepts and techniques being included and implemented. Examples of Game Sense: AFL. Call It: Allows the players to develop their handball and encourage the players to think about who the can next pass the ball to (tactical understanding and decision making). Keep the ball alive: Players will be developing skills in catching and throwing NS tactics to enable the most amount of balls to be still in play at the end of the give time.
Examples of Game Sense: Netball Students are learning basic fundamental skills of netball. Rationale. The overall purpose of implementing Game Sense and Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) is to encourage and increase the student’s participation in physical education and the playing of sports. Through Game Sense, the designated games enable physical skills and techniques to be gain, while also teaching individuals that sport is not just about the physicalities.
The games and questioning aim to teach and enable reflection thus resulting in thinking, reasoning and decision making skills to be gained. In playing games and teaching games for understanding students are learning to understand what to do rather than how to do it which is identified by Pill (2011) to be a more substantial way. Game Sense and Teaching Games for Understanding will further and ensure the require outcomes to be achieved. Through this approach the aim is to provide positive learning experiences. Links to the PDHPE Syllabus.
It is the PDHPE syllabus objective to provide set programs and experiences to ensure all students are provided with an opportunity to participate in regular and varied physical education lesson (SYLLABUS). NOTE: This information and linking will be based upon the 6v6 Keeping Off game highlighted in the previous slides. The annotation will be based on the stage stage outcomes.
COS2.1: Students will communication with members of the team through verbal and non-verbal/actions DMS2.2: Individual a student decides who they are going to throw the ball to. As a group decision can be made upon if a game play is going to be followed or implemented. INS2.3: Team work MOS2.4: Students are throwing, catching, running, pivoting, side stepping and creating space are some of the movements involved in playing this modified game of netball. PSS2.5: Strategies: Students are thinking of ways to either get the ball, keep possession of the ball. Student often reflect upon past experiences and related to the present games. Links to the PDHPE Syllabus Active Life Style: ALS2.6: Student participates and plays the modified game Playing in teams: Teamwork Learning skills and techniques through games.
Reflection and Questioning Throwing, catching, running, stopping, positioning Games and Sports. References:. Board of Studies, NSW. Personal Development Health and Physical Education.
Sydney, Australia: Board of Studies. Coaches’ experiences of Game Sense: opportunities and challenges. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 9(2), 115-131.
Game Sense: Pedagogy for performance, participation and enjoyment. New York: Routledge. Teacher engagement with teaching games for understanding- game sense in physical education.
Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 11(2), 115-123. Play with purpose: developing game sense in AFL footballers. Hindmarsh, South Australia: Australian Council for health, physical education and recreation. Developing Netball Game Sense: teaching movement skills and tactical skills. Hindmarsh, South Australia: Australian Council for health, physical education and recreation.