Technical exploration of the tactical performance effectiveness through men's world handball championship in Spain 2013 Abstract: Dr/ Ahmed Mohamed Elkot (*) This Research aims to identify tactical defense and offence variables in handball which most used and effective for superior teams and Egyptian team in handball by using two computer software which are designed by the researcher before " O.P.A.S for handball, D.P.A.S for handball ", these two software enable us to explore and calculate the efficiency of performance, the researcher used the descriptive method, sample included (20) matches for winning teams with first three ranks in men's world handball championship in Spain 2013 which are (Spain Denmark Croatia) plus Egyptian team matches, the most important results is the presence of some tactical defense and attack variables more used but less effective and the opposite for both superior and Egyptian team, and there is some differences for the superior teams in comparison with Egyptian team in efficiency of some tactical defense and offence variables have a positive effect in obtaining superior position in championship. Introduction: Handball is one of competitive gaming which is characterized by fast and continuous change of its events and different situations during the match, as well as the constant change for playing methods and defensive and offensive plans in different world tournaments and championships in order to cope with player s high physical, skill and tactical level. (Khaled Hussein Mohamed, 2000: p2) Handball differ in nature as a team sport from many other team sports in terms of speed rhythm and dynamic change between defense and attack operations which continue without interruption throughout match time. (Mohamed Khaled Hammouda, Yasser Hassan Dabour, 1995: p69) In order to achieve the team goal to win the match, it should be coordination between the efforts of individual players to perform any unified collective act and this should be through play plans. (Mohamed Khaled Hammouda, Jalal Kamal Salem, 2008:182). In order to implement play plans effectively and productively, each player must fulfill his duties while doing tactical work so that team members see things the same way and are also thinking the same way. (Amani Hussein Mohamed, 2005:p23) Tactical work in collective Games is one of the important factors relied upon by teams during matches, it is within work that coaches try to teach to players and preparing them in order to obtain numerical superiority to score a goal and hence win the match. (Adel Ibrahim Ahmad, 2000: p261) The final result of the competition is in fact the process of assessing, win, draw or defeat is the assessment that is significant in rank team and performance in local or works tournaments, it is also a final evaluation for previous training period. (Kamal Darwish, Imad Eldin Abbas, Sami Mohammed Ali, 1999: p352) *Corresponding Author: Ahmed Mohammed El-kot, Department of Theories and Applications of Team Sports and Tennis Sports, Faculty of Physical Education, Benha University, Egypt -1-
The importance of game analysis method is that it helps technical responsible to correct player errors and supports the pros to acquire players the appropriate physical and technical for performance in the following matches. (Mohammed Abdu Saleh, Mufti Ibrahim Hammad, 1994: p169) Ibanez et all (2003, p1) indicates that it is important to develop recording and evaluating indicators of players performance in the ground, and are computer programs are an essential means to analyze and evaluate players movements during training or match. Researcher indicates that technical exploration is one of the effective methods characterized by modernity in measuring each team effectiveness level and reduces the incidence of registry errors and helps to collect and dump data that is recorded at first hand and calculate the effectiveness automatically to get statistical report, so the researcher used this method of exploration using (2) programs which had been prepared by the researcher before. Based on the foregoing researcher in the opinion that athletic competition is the outcome of training process, and through it team level could be judged. By noting some European teams, we find that they are subject to short or long term planning can be judged through two aspects; first is the rotation of specific teams to win world and Olympic championships (constant level) and the second is the process of change in the players in all world championships and try to strengthen teams with youngsters which in turn lead to change most of team players within few years without affecting full team structure. On the contrary, with what happen in Egyptian national team since 2001 when Egyptian team won 4 th rank in the World Cup in France and then began a complete change for the team since 12-years and the Egyptian team is out of this level. Researcher trying in this study to find strengths and weaknesses within Egyptian team and the top teams to take advantage of it to avoid the negatives and strengthen the pros, these results may help the study of the technical committee of the Egyptian Union for planning training programs based on objective grounds for developing Egyptian handball. Research objectives: This research aims to: Identifying tactical offensive and defensive variables most commonly used using technical exploration of top teams and Egyptian team during the World Cup men's handball, Spain, 2013. Identifying the effectiveness of performance variables tactical offensive and defensive variables for top teams and Egyptian team during the World Cup men's handball, Spain, 2013. Research queries: What are the tactical offensive and defensive variables most commonly used using technical exploration of top teams and Egyptian team during the World Cup men's handball, Spain, 2013? Is there significant variance in the effectiveness of performance variables tactical offensive and defensive variables between top teams and Egyptian team during the World Cup men's handball, Spain, 2013? Research Terms: Technical Exploration (procedural): it is a method of match analysis used by coach to get information about his team and competitor teams during and after the -2-
mach using one of the modern computerized techniques because of their great ability in speed recording and storage. Tactical Performance (procedural): are the mechanic movements that rely on a single player or group of players to accomplish a task, whether in attack or defense. Research procedures: Research Methodology: The researcher used the scanning descriptive approach due to its relevance to research nature. Research community: Research community was matches of World Cup Men's Handball Championship, Spain, 2013, which was held in the period from Jan 12 th to Jan 27 th 2013. Research sample: Research sample included (20) matches selected intentionally- for winning teams with first three ranks in men's world handball championship in Spain 2013 which are (Spain Denmark Croatia) plus Egyptian team matches; (6) matches for each team noting that there were common matches for teams in sample Table (1) Sample matches No Match Round No Match Round No Match Round 1 Egypt - Spain Preliminary 8 Denmark - Russia Preliminary 15 Denmark - Hungary Quarterfinal 2 Egypt Hungary Preliminary 9 Croatia - Algeria Preliminary 16 Croatia - France Quarterfinal 3 Egypt Australia Preliminary 10 Spain - Serbia Round of 16 17 Spain - Slovenia Semifinal 4 Egypt Croatia Preliminary 11 Denmark - Tunisia Round of 16 18 Denmark - Croatia Semifinal 5 Egypt Algeria Preliminary 12 Croatia - Belarus Round of 16 19 Spain - Denmark Final 6 Spain Hungary Preliminary 13 Egypt - Slovenia Round of 16 20 Croatia - Slovenia final 7 Denmark Iceland Preliminary 14 Spain - Germany Quarterfinal Data collection tools and methods: * Computer Device: To use in recording sample matches using USB TV and operating analysis and exploration software (Dpas For Handball, opas For Handball ) to explore tactical performance effectiveness in handball * Matches exploration programs: Researcher used (2) programs which he have designed before and their validity and reliability have been proofed: Opas For Handball : which can explore offensive tactical performance and automatically calculate performance effectiveness during the exploration process and It includes effectiveness levels for fast break, organized, attack, plan work and attack formations which are: (Scoring a goal), 6 marks. - (Gain penalty ) 5 marks (Attacker block and acquisitions) 4 marks. - (Gain free throw) 3 marks (Defender block and acquisitions) 2 marks. - (Out of the goal) 1mark. (attacker fault) zero mark. (Ahmed Mohamed Elkot, 2011: p66) Attach number (1) shown analysis screen by using (OPAS For handball) software Dpas For Handball: which is used to explore the defensive tactical performance and calculate its effectiveness for man-to-man, zone and compound defense through the following levels: -3-
(Stop the attacker and acquisitions) 3 marks. (Stop the attacker, no acquisition and free / side throw) 2 marks. (Stop the attacker, no acquisition and penalty) 1 mark. (Ineffective obstruction for the attacker) zero mark. (Ahmed Mohamed ElKot 2012,: p5) Attach number (2) shown analysis screen by using (DPAS For handball) software Researcher depended in determining attack/defense effectiveness level on final attack result as it express the actual attack/defense effectiveness and productivity. Statistical work:- The researcher used the following statistical treatments: Percentage, Efficiency equation Total(efficiency level repetition x its marks) Efficiency = Grand total of performance repetition (Yasser Hassan Dabour, 1994: 144) Results and discussion Table (2) Total repetition, percentage and effectiveness level of fast break attack types for teams (research sample) Teams Fast Break Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank types Simple 27 31.8 82.1 1 st 19 15.3 54.4 4 th 2 39 27.7 76.9 nd 25 30.9 65.3 3 rd (individual Expanded 43 50.6 72.1 1 st 69 55.6 58.2 3 rd 73 51.8 57.1 4 th 40 49.4 72.1 1 st (group) Planned 15 17.6 52.2 4 (team) th 36 29.0 81.5 1 st 2 29 20.6 74.7 nd 16 19.8 68.8 3 rd Total 85 100 71.8 1 st 124 100 64.4 4 th 141 100 66.2 3 rd 81 100 69.3 2 nd Table (2) show that group fast break is the most fast break type used for both top teams and Egyptian team followed by individual then team, these results in agreement with results of Mustafa Mahmoud Mustafa (2002), and Ahmed Mohammed Elkot (2011) studies The table also revealed high effectiveness rate for individual and group fast break attack for Spanish team who win the champion by 82.1%, 72.1% respectively researcher agrees with what was said by Farouk Elsayed. Ghazi (1993) where he pointed that group fast break formation is most effective fast break attack in scoring goals. Team fast break attack was the least commonly used for all teams (in sample) Denmark team was first ranked in effectiveness of this type with effectiveness rate of 81.5%, then Croatian team with 74.7%, then Egyptian team 68.8% then Spain 52.2%. This can be interpreted by what mentioned by Ahmed Mohamed Elkot (2011, p130) that the attacking team resorted this type of attack in the case of players rebound to back and occupying their defense and position and fast movement forward to make largest number of attackers participate and attacking team often perform organized attack and therefore team fast break do not complete. Researcher refer to that Spain team who got the championship was ranked first in group fast break attack using and effectiveness; which can be interpreted by the ability of Spain team to start individual fast break attack throw wings; and in case of failure due to rebound of some defenders rebound so they involve some other players to expand the fast break attack action by one or more players to reach to goal and shot; this group (expanded) fast break completed). -4-
Table (3) Total repetition, percentage and effectiveness level of organized fast break attack formations for teams (research sample) Teams Fast Break types Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank 3/3 286 67.5 57.5 1 st 240 65.0 56.4 2 nd 262 70.1 54.6 4 th 302 69.9 56.2 3 rd 4/2 70 16.5 58.8 2 nd 87 23.6 56.9 3 rd 62 16.6 59.4 1 st 49 11.3 54.8 4 th 2/4 26 6.1 60.3 4 th 7 1.9 71.4 1 st 3 0.8 61.1 3 rd 23 5.3 65.9 2 nd 5/1 0 0.0 0-6 1.6 83.3 1 st 12 3.2 50.0 2nd 0 0.0 0-4/1 8 1.9 41.7 4 th 11 3.0 42.4 3 rd 9 2.4 42.6 2 nd 18 4.2 53.7 1 st 3/2 34 8.0 60.3 1 st 18 4.9 44.4 4 th 26 7.0 55.1 2 nd 40 9.3 51.3 3 rd 4/0 0 0.0 0-0 0.0 0-0 0.0 0-0 0.0 0 - Total 424 100 57.8 1 st 369 100 56.2 2 nd 374 100 55.0 4 th 432 100 56.0 3 rd Table (3) results revealed that 3/3 formation is the most attack formation used for all teams in the sample, Croatia team ranked first with percentage of 70.1%, followed by the Spain team with 67.5%, then Egypt team 69.9%, and at last Denmark team with 65%, these results in agreement with "Farouk ElSayed Ghazi (1993), Akram Kamel Ibrahim (2000), Amani Hussein Mohammed (2005), Ahmed Mohammed Elkot (2011). Spain team the winning of championship was ranked first in 3/3 formation effectiveness with rate of 57.5%, followed by the Denmark team 56.4%, Egypt and Croatia teams with rate of 56.2% and 54.6% respectively. Mohammed Khaled Hamouda, Jalal Kamal Salem (2008, pp215-216) indicate that this formation is fundamental in all handball matches and used in case of availability of players specialized in far shooting, and is characterized by availability of player guarding defense deepness for the whole team throughout attack process that is the middle back attacker. Same table also shows that there is a disparity between effectiveness and usage of 2/4 formation, which was more effective for both Spain and Croatia, and Egypt teams, while 5/1 formation was:5 more effective for Denmark team Despite the high effectiveness rate, they were the less commonly used for all teams in sample. While for using organizational attack Spain team ranked first with effectiveness rate of 57.8%, followed Denmark, Egypt, Croatia teams with 56.2%, 56%, 55% rates respectively. In case of attacker shortage all teams adopted 3/2 formation and the most team got 2 minutes suspension was Egyptian team when compared, and this formation was the most effective for top teams in case of attacker shortage, the formation of 4/1 was more effective for Egyptian team. Researcher explains using 3/2 formation to that the suspended player is always a circle player, these results is consistent with results of Adel Ibrahim Ahmad (2000), and what mentioned by Muhammad Khalid Hamouda, Yasser Hassan Dabour (1995, p267) that suspended player always replaced by circle player. Table (4) Total repetition, percentage and effectiveness level of plan work for teams (research sample) Teams Fast Break Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank types Individua 262 51.5 58.8 1 l Tactical st 162 32.9 50.7 4 th 3 220 42.7 52.4 rd 346 67.4 54.4 2 nd Group 214 42.0 60.6 2 Tactical nd 274 55.6 58.3 4 th 3 253 49.1 60.0 rd 145 28.3 66.1 1 st Team 33 6.5 67.2 3 Tactical rd 57 11.6 79.8 1 st 42 8.2 76.2 2 nd 22 4.3 62.9 4 th Total 509 100 60.1 1 st 493 100 58.3 2 nd 515 100 58.1 3 rd 513 100 58.1 3 rd -5-
Fast break ORGANIZED ATTACK Table (4) result reveal that individual was used more by Span and Egypt team with percentage of 58.8%, 54.4%, respectively, group tactical mass more commonly used by Denmark and Croatia teams with percentages of 55.6% and 49.1%, respectively. Same table also shows that individual tactical plan is less effective for all teams in sample; researcher explain this that individual performance lead to random attack and make most of the team players commit different attack errors as competitor entrance errors; on contrary to group play which is performed according to competitor defense method. Table (4) indicates that Spain ranked first in individual tactical effectiveness with rate of 58.8% and it depends largely on this kind of tactical playing. As for the team tactical, it was more effective for top teams; Denmark ranked first, followed by Croatia, then Spain, and at last Egypt team with effectiveness rate of 79.8%, 76.2%, 67.2% and 62.9% respectively. In spite high effectiveness rate within top teams; it was the least used. These results in consistent results with the results of a study Yasser Hassan Dabour (1993) where he pointed out that the work team tactical ratio used is very low despite the high success rate significantly (15: 357) Total tactical work were most effective within top teams, Denmark team ranked first, followed by Spain, Croatia and Egypt teams with rates of 60.1%, 58.3%, 58.1%., 58.1% respectively Researcher would like to highlight that convergence of effectiveness rates of tactical work between Egypt team and top teams do not give an indication of the convergence and stability performance level and integration of various aspects of tactical work, but there is a gap in integration of players performance and movement harmony in Egypt team and training experience for top teams. Table (5) Total repetition, percentage and effectiveness level of attack formation ended with Shooting for teams (research sample) Sample teams Attack formations Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Cut 0 0 0-1 20.0 100 1 st 0 0.0 0-0 0.0 0 - Tackle 0 0 0-0 0.0 0-0 0.0 0-0 0.0 0 - Exchange 0 0 0-0 0.0 0-3 33.3 77.8 2 nd 1 50.0 100 1 st Half 0 0 0-0 0.0 0-0 0.0 0-0 0.0 0 - exchange Breakthrough 0 0 0-4 80.0 100 1 st 6 66.7 88.9 2 nd 1 50.0 100 1 st Total 0 0 0-5 4.2 100 1 st 9 7.9 85.2 2 nd 2 2.2 100 1 st Cut 17 17.0 72.5 1 st 22 19.3 72.0 2 nd 17 16.2 64.7 3 rd 14 15.4 64.3 4 th Tackle 12 12.0 83.3 2 nd 1 0.9 100 1 st 8 7.6 70.8 4 th 13 14.3 75.6 3 rd Exchange 57 57.0 51.8 4 th 71 62.3 58.7 3 rd 62 59.0 62.4 1 st 57 62.6 59.1 2 nd Half 8 8.0 54.2 4 exchange th 10 8.8 58.3 3 rd 1 4 3.8 83.3 st 2 2.2 66.7 2 nd Breakthrough 6 6.0 88.9 2 nd 10 8.8 100 1 st 14 13.3 84.5 3 rd 5 5.5 80.0 4 th Total 100 100 61.5 4 th 114 95.8 65.2 2 nd 105 92.1 67.1 1 st 91 97.8 63.6 3 rd All total 100 100 61.5 4 th 119 100 66.7 2 nd 114 100 68.6 1 st 93 100 64.3 3 rd Table (5) indicates that position exchange is the most formation used by sample teams to end by shooting, usage percentage was 57%, 62.3%, 59% and 62% for Spain, Denmark, Croatia and Egypt team respectively, followed by cut for Spain, Denmark, Croatia and Egypt teams with low percentage of 17%, 19.3%, 16.2%, 15.4%, respectively. Breakthrough ranked first for effectiveness rate for all teams in sample, where effectiveness rate was 88.9%, 100%, 84.5% and 80% for Spain, Denmark, Croatia, and Egypt respectively, despite the high effectiveness rate, it was less frequently used. -6-
Same table also shows lack of usage of attack formation during fast break, and researcher indicate that attack formation may slow down attack process during fast break attack process. Table (6) Total repetition, percentage of effective cooperation between playmaker and shooter for teams (research sample) Positions Playmaker Sample teams Rep. % Rep. % Rep. % Rep. % CB 157 74.8 158 77.5 199 70.1 170 65.4 LB 30 14.3 23 11.3 36 12.7 38 14.6 RB 13 6.2 10 4.9 30 10.6 33 12.7 LW 6 2.9 9 4.4 7 2.5 3 1.2 RW 2 1.0 2 1.0 2 0.7 5 1.9 L 2 1.0 2 1.0 10 3.5 11 4.2 Total 210 100.0 204 100.0 284 100.0 260 100.0 CB 33 15.7 27 13.2 53 18.7 34 13.1 LB 88 41.9 105 51.5 114 40.1 80 30.8 RB 56 26.7 37 18.1 76 26.8 66 25.4 Shooter LW 9 4.3 18 8.8 11 3.9 37 14.2 RW 11 5.2 3 1.5 11 3.9 26 10.0 L 13 6.2 14 6.9 19 6.7 17 6.5 Total 210 100.0 204 100.0 284 100.0 260 100.0 Table (6) show that CB, followed by LB were the most position used as playmaker with usage percentage 74.8%, 14.3% for Spain team, 77.5%, 11.3% for Denmark, 70.1%, 12.7%, for Croatia and 65.4%, 14.6% for Egypt respectively, while came the rest of the playing positions rarely used as playmaker. These results in agreement with Amani Hussein Mohamed (2005, p129) results, where she pointed that CB player is the most effective in attack as he is usually the player with most experience and the ability to lead the team. Table (6) also shows that the most effective position as shooter was LB followed by RB as usage percentage were 41.9%, 26.7% for Spain, 51.5%, 18.1% for Denmark, 40.1%, 26.8% for Croatia, and 30.8%, 25.4% for Egypt, respectively. The results indicate that there are deficiencies in ending tactical attack by wings, researcher return this to the defense formation and method used by sample teams which prevent arrival of the ball to players in the front line. Table (7) Total repetition, percentage and effectiveness level of Man to Man defense for teams (research sample) Sample teams Man to Man defense Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Between 6m and 9m lines 2 2.2 50 4 th 12 11.9 83.3 1 st 9 9 63.0 3 rd 22 20.8 63.6 2 nd Half court 1 1.1 100 1 st 5 5.0 53.3 4 th 3 3 55.6 3 rd 4 3.8 91.7 2 nd Full court 86 96.6 57 1 st 84 83.2 54.4 2 nd 88 88 50.4 3 rd 80 75.5 37.1 4 th Total 89 100 57.3 2 nd 101 100 57.8 1 st 100 100 51.7 3 rd 106 100 44.7 4 th It is clear from Table (7) that Man to man defense using full court is the most commonly used for all teams top teams were first by usage rate 96.6%, 83.2%, 88% for Spain, Denmark, Croatia, and Egyptian team was last with percentage of 75.5%, researcher indicates that this method is followed in the case of defense against fast break attack due to random return of defenders and not occupying there defense positions, as -7-
each player is responsible fromm the attacker half court till end of the attack in the defender half court. This confirmed by Kamal al-din Darwish et al (1999, p77) who argued that man to man defense in full court should be used against fast break attack in order to spoil tactical perception for attacker team and his prevent players from achieving numerical increment, preferably defense by inherence and do not do delivery and receipt. Same table also indicates also that man to man defense in half court is the less commonly used, as all team sample recorded low percentages, researcher explains this results by that this method rarely used by some teams in case of narrow score difference in the late second half, in which case the team tries to defend in a Advanced manner (inherence defense) to try to cut the ball and acquisitions and attack to score a goal against the opposing team. As shown in Table (7) that the top teams recorded the highest effectiveness percentage for inherence defense (man to man) Denmark ranked first, followed by Spain and Croatia with percentage of 57.8%, 57.3%, 51.7%, respectively, and then Egypt team ranked last with percentage of 44.7%. Table (8) Total repetition, percentage and effectiveness level of Zone defense formations for teams (research sample) Sample teams defense formations Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank 6/0 125 35.0 64.3 2 nd 189 49.5 55.2 4 th 209 56.0 64.4 1 st 23 6.3 60.9 3 rd 5/1 63 17.6 57.7 4 th 62 16.2 66.1 1 st 62 16.6 62.4 3 rd 79 21.5 64.6 2nd 4/2 75 21.0 67.1 1 st 52 13.6 55.8 3 rd 23 6.2 53.6 4 th 112 30.4 63.1 2nd 3/3 31 8.7 69.9 1 st 23 6.0 63.8 4 th 13 3.5 66.7 3 rd 68 18.5 66.7 2nd 3/2/1 20 5.6 63.3 3 rd 26 6.8 65.4 2nd 23 6.2 75.4 1 st 49 13.3 57.1 4 th 5/0 31 8.7 52.7 2 nd 21 5.5 38.1 4 th 38 10.2 59.6 1 st 29 7.9 39.1 3 rd 4/1 8 2.2 66.7 2 nd 7 1.8 81.0 1 st 4 1.1 50.0 3 rd 7 1.9 38.1 4 th 4/0 0 0.0 0-1 0.3 0.0-0 0.0 0-0 0.0 0-3/2 4 1.1 83.3 2 nd 1 0.3 66.7 3 rd 1 0.3 100 1 st 1 0.3 0.0 - Total 357 100 63.4 2 nd 382 100 57.7 4 th 373 100 63.6 1 st 368 100 60.6 3 rd Table (8) reveal that 6/0 was the most zone defense formation used by top teams, as usage percentage was 35%, 49.5%, and 56% for Spain, Denmark and Croatia teams respectively, these results is in agreement with Amani Hussein Mohamed (2005).4/2 formation was the mostly used formation by Egypt team with usage percentage of 30.4% in case of complete number of defenders. 6/0 formation was also the most effective for top teams Croatia and Spain with 64.4%, 64.3% effectiveness percentage. Kamal al-din Darwish et all (1999, p55) confirmed that 6/0 formation is the basis of other zone defense formations in case of availability of players mastering defensive duties. Table (8) also show that 5/0 defense formation is the mostly used for all sample teams in the case of defenders shortage, Croatia ranked first for usage and effectiveness by 10.2%, 59.6%, followed by Spain by 8.7%, 52.7%, then Egypt team by 7.9%, 39.1%, and then the Denmark team last by 5.5%, 38.1%, respectively. These results in agreement with Amani Hussein Mohamed (2005, p90) results; where she indicates that defensive duties in this formation are the same duties as 6/0 formation which is the base from which all other formations start. (4: 90) -8-
Table (8) also shows that the Croatia team ranked first in effectiveness of zone defense formations by 63.6%, followed by the Spain 63.4%, then Egypt 60.6% and lastly Denmark 57.7%. Table (9) Total repetition, percentage and effectiveness level of applied methods of Zone defense for teams (research sample) Sample teams Zone defense methods Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Without attack 86 24.1 34.1 3 rd 104 27.2 26.9 4 th 110 29.5 57.0 1 st 45 12.2 41.5 2 nd Positive with attack 243 68.1 73.9 1 st 236 61.8 70.1 2 nd 230 61.7 64.9 4 th 248 67.4 65.3 3 rd Pressing / strong 28 7.8 61.9 3 rd 42 11.0 64.3 2 nd 33 8.8 76.8 1 st 75 20.4 56.4 4 th total 357 100 63.4 2 nd 382 100 57.7 4 th 373 100 63.6 1 st 368 100 60.6 3 rd Table (9) indicates that zone defense (positive with attack method) was the mostly used applied method, with usage percentage rate 68.1%, 61.8%, 61.7%, and 67.4% for Spain, Denmark, Croatia and Egypt teams respectively, that followed by without attack method, at last was pressing/strong method. Researcher mat attribute this result to that in this method take their defense positions and take positive actions to reduce risk of attacker shooting, in opposite with without attacking, which player only make side movements, which do not always commensurate with the attack method used. As shown in Table (9) that pressing method is the lowest used by top teams, which may range from 7.8% to 11% and researcher interpret this with what mentioned by Muhammad Abdullah AlmArdi (2008, p182) that this method is the most zone defense tactic repetition for players mistakes. Researcher also highlight that pressing method increases the risk rate on goal and this method success rate is completely less than other two methods due to o sudden onslaught the player acquired the ball and because of the development of attack performance skills and deception movements used, which make a defensive gap near goal circle, and it is usually less effective as shown in table (9). Table (9) shows also that Spain team ranked first in the effectiveness of positive with attack method which is the mostly used with effectiveness rate of 73.9%, followed by Denmark 70.1%, Egypt 65% and lastly Croatia 64.9%. Table (10) Total repetition, percentage and effectiveness level of combined defense for teams (research sample) Sample teams Combined defense Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank Rep. % Effectiv. rank 5/0+1 41 97.6 62.6 1 st 21 100 52.4 3 rd 8 66.7 58.3 2 nd 8 100 45.8 4 th 4/0+2 1 2.4 66.7 1 st 0 0 0-4 33.3 66.7 1 st 0 0 0-4/0+1 0 0 0-0 0 0-0 0 0-0 0 0 - Total 42 100 62.7 1 st 21 100 52.4 3 rd 12 100 61.1 2 nd 8 100 45.8 4 th Table (10) results show that 5/0+1 defense formation was the mostly used cmbined defense formation by all sample teams, with usage percentage 97.6%, 10%, 66.7%, and 100% for Spain, Denmark, Croatia and Egypt teams. These results are consistent with the results of Adel Ibrahim Ahmed (2000), and Amani Hussein Mohammed (2005). Researcher attributed teams using for this combined formation sue to fast acquisition and start fast break attack or to spoil the team tactical perception for the -9-
attacking team or to exclude dangerous attack player which weakens the attack in one hand and forcing the attacking team to finish on the other. Spain team ranked first in 5/0+1 combined formation effectiveness with 62.6%, followed by Croatian, Denmark, and Egypt teams with 58.3%, 52.4%, and 45.8% effectiveness rates respectively. 4/0 +2 combined defense formation was in the second place for both Spain and Croatia teams with percentage of 2.4%, 33.3% respectively, while the rest of teams have not used this formation completely, and all sample teams did not use 4/0+1 formation in case of defenders shortage. Conclusions (Group fast break / 3/3 attack formation / 3/2 attack formation in case players shortage/ individual and group tactical / cut and position exchange attack formations / man to man defense against fast break in full court/ 6/0 defense formation in case of full players in court/ 5/0 defense formation in case of defenders shortage / zone defense with positive attack / 5/0+1 combined defense formation) variables were the mostly used tactical performance variables by top teams and Egypt team during the championship. There is disparity between teams in the effectiveness of fast break attack types. Spain team ranked first in the effectiveness of (individual and group fast break attack/ 3/3 attack formation/ organized attack) during the championship. (team fast break attack/ team tactical work / tackling, half exchange and Breakthrough attack formations / Ending attack formation by players in front line/ 4/0+2 combined defense formation) was the lowest tactical attack and defense variables used by sample teams. Top teams ranked first in tactical work effectiveness during the championship. CB is most position used as playmaker, and both LB and RB was the most positions used as shooter for all sample teams. Positive zone defense with attack was the most effective zone defense methods for top teams compared the Egypt team. Man to man defense effectiveness was higher for top teams compared with Egypt team during the championship. Recommendations It is necessary to use this study results by technical committee of Egyptian Federation of Handball to be aware about the latest tactical evaluation of Egyptian national team to push Egyptian handball forward. It is necessary to plan for Egyptian handball team in light of champion results and give more interest in training for attack and defense tactical performance variables which were most effective within top teams in tournament. Attention should be paid to matches exploration process using modern technologies in the field of handball which save time and effort, speed and ease of recording process, which requires us to use these techniques during the actual time for match to amend team shortcomings. Further studies to be carried out depending on modern technologies to help in plan handball training on objective basis. -11-
References Adel Ibrahim Ahmad (2000): Analysis of tactical performance during numerical change in handball matvhes, published research, the scientific journal of Physical Education and Sports, No. XIX, Faculty of Physical Education for Girls, Alexandria University. (in Arabic Language) Ahmed Mohamed Elkot (2011): design a computer program to evaluate offensive performance level in handball during match, PhD, Faculty of Physical Education for Men, Benha University, 2011. (in Arabic Language) Ahmed Mohamed ElKot (2012): Modern technological software to explore planned defense during handball matches, International Scientific Conference, November 2012, Faculty of Physical Education for Men, Assiut University. (in Arabic Language) Akram Kamel Ibrahim (2000): An analytical study of the attack and defense formations for Handball national team and its correlation with match results in Atlanta Olympic Games, Master Thesis, Faculty of Physical Education for Girls, Helwan University. (in Arabic Language) Amani Hussein Mohamed (2005): Mutual impact of attack and defense plans on the effectiveness of organized attack in end phase in men's handball matches, PhD, Faculty of Physical Education for Girls, Alexandria University. (in Arabic Language) Farouk ElSayed Ghazi (1993): An analytical study of effect of attack types on match results in handball, the scientific journal of Physical Education and Sports, No. XV, Faculty of Physical Education for Men, Alexandria University. (in Arabic Language) Ibanez et al (2005) : software for basketball player's evaluation in real time, faculty of sports Science University of Extremadura, Spain. Kamal Darwish, Imad Eldin Abbas, Sami Mohammed Ali (1999): Defense in handball, book publication center, Cairo. (in Arabic Language) Kamal Darwish, Kadri Morsi, Imad Abbas: the measurement and evaluation and analysis of the game in handball "theories and applications," the center of the book for publication, first edition, 2002. (in Arabic Language) Khaled Hussein Mohamed (2000): the effectiveness of pressing offensive defense and its impact on the results of the Egyptian handball national team matches, Master Thesis, Faculty of Physical Education for men in Cairo, Helwan University. (in Arabic Language) Mohamed Khaled Hammouda, Jalal Kamal Salem(2008): attack and defense in handball, Maaref est., Alexandria. (in Arabic Language) Mohamed Khaled Hammouda, Yasser Hassan Dabour(1995): Attack in handball, El- Deeb Press, Alexandria. (in Arabic Language) Mohammed Abdu Saleh, Mufti Ibrahim Hammad(1994): football basics, the world of knowledge House, Cairo. (in Arabic Language) Mohammed Abdullah Almardi (2008): technical variables for defense methods and its relationship with legal mistakes in handball, Master Thesis, Faculty of Physical Education for Men, Banha University. (in Arabic Language) -11-
Mostafa Mahmoud Mostafa: an analytical study of offensive and defensive performance of the Egyptian national team in the 16 th handball World Championship, PhD, Faculty of Physical Education for Men, Zagazig University, 2002. (in Arabic Language) Yasser Hassan Dabour (1993): An analytical study of the productivity of organized tactical attack for some handball Premier League teams in Arab Republic of Egypt, scientific journal of Physical Education and Sports, No. XVI, Faculty of Physical Education for Men, Alexandria University. (in Arabic Language) Yasser Hassan Dabour (1994): An analytical study of tactical formation which ended from wing and back position in handball, scientific journal of Physical Education and Sports, Volume XIX, Faculty of Physical Education for Men, Alexandria University. (in Arabic Language) -12-
Attach number (1) analysis screen by using (OPAS For handball) software -13-
Attach number (2) analysis screen by using (DPAS For handball) software -14-