Efficiency of 1-on-1 play situations for high-level soccer players during the World and European championships in relation to position on the pitch and match time

Abstract

The aim of the study was to assess the efficiencies of players in 1-on-1 situations in terms of their position on the pitch and the match time during the final matches of the World Cup and European Championships from 1990 to 2014. The research was conducted on a sample of 1012 football players whose teams competed in the semi-finals, finals and the third place matches during the Football World Cup and European Championships from 1990 to 2014. The study included the performances of 506 players in 1-on-1 situations during 46 matches that were terminated at the regulation 90 min. The study revealed that during an average match, the players performed 231 times in 1-on-1 situations with 51% accuracy. The level of accuracy in 1-on-1 situations was significantly higher (p ≤ 0.05) in winning teams than in losing teams particularly at the beginning of the game and in the middle zone of the pitch. Moreover, the results of our study showed that the highest effectiveness of the duels was noted in the defence zone and was decreasing along with moving the actions closer to the opponent’s goal. The players competed with similar frequencies on both defence (114 duels on average with 51% accuracy) and attack (113 duels on average with 52% accuracy). The players of the elite football teams exhibited high performance efficiencies in the 1-on-1 duels, especially on their own half of the field and during the early stages of both halves of the match. The accuracy of duels of their performances decreased when the action moved closer to the opponent’s goal and with the time in the game.

Keywords

Association football performance analysis sport analytics

Introduction

Similar to other team sports, football involves individual performances to achieve the aims of the entire team (according to the rule let the ball do the work). However, this does not mean that the activities in 1-on-1 situations are less important for the team rivalry. The efficiency of an individual results in the efficiency of the performance of the whole team and can determine final victory or failure, especially when defensive play is considered. Oberstone¹ claims that the number of successful tackles (taking possession of the ball from the opponent) differentiates higher and lower ranked teams. Moreover, Almeida et al.² and Vogelbein et al.³ revealed that the effectiveness of tackling and stealing the ball is related to winning matches. According to Hossini et al.,⁴ the individual defensive ability of a team to control the opposing team’s movements greatly affects success. Moreover, Shafizadeh et al.⁵ claimed that efficiency in 1-on-1 defensive play was one of the factors related to success among the quarter-finalists of the European Championships in 2012. Furthermore, Liu et al.⁶ revealed that the probability of success in a match increases with the amount of ball tackling and decreases with dribbling. The study of Rampinini et al.⁷ revealed that the players from successful teams are more effective in individual play during both offense (dribbling) and defence (tackling the ball and head duels) than the players of the losing teams.

Scientific studies have confirmed the importance of individual performances to the efficiency of the whole team. However, the literature regarding match analyses of senior players indicates that many works have concentrated on key factors of the specific fitness of the football players.⁸ Only a few works have exclusively focused on the efficiency of 1-on-1 performances in terms of time and place of occurrence.^9–11 Generally, 1-on-1 matchups have been more broadly analysed in combination with other key performance indicators (offensive and defensive).^5,6,12–17 From the practical point of view, determining the effectiveness of offensive and defensive actions with reference to the match time and zone of the field is certainly very important. The knowledge of the time dependency and place dependency of 1-on-1 duels occurrence may be useful in preparing to the game. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to evaluate the effectiveness of 1-on-1 duels according to the match time and area of the pitch during the final games of the World Cup and European Championships from 1990 to 2014. It was assumed that the accuracy of the offensive and defensive duels will be higher in winning teams rather than in losing teams especially at the beginning of each half and in the middle zone of the pitch.

A 1-on-1 duel is usually defined as an interaction between two players (located directly in the playing area) from opposite teams who are trying to realize contrary goals according to the game rules. The offensive 1-on-1 game consists of the actions of a player with a ball and the aims of scoring a goal, creating a scoring opportunity, attaining the playing area or keeping possession of the ball. In contrast, all actions focused against the player with the ball (e.g. intercepting the ball and breaking or blocking the movement of the ball) qualify as 1-on-1 defensive play.¹⁸ These definitions do not include struggling to control free balls. Free ball duels are competitions between two players without the ball who are seeking to take possession. These actions involve random situations (e.g. long balls and rebounds) when two rivals are located surprisingly close to the ball and both are simultaneously trying to intercept the ball. Performance efficiency in this case includes the following:

Activity (the number of activities of a specific type performed by the players of one team during the match),

Effectiveness (the number of activities of a specific type performed with the achievement of the aim),

Duel accuracy (the ratio of effective activities to all activities in the match) of the offensive and defensive performances in 1-on-1 situations in terms of the time and place in the game.

The aim of the study was to assess the efficiency of players in 1-on-1 situations in terms of their position on the pitch and the match time during the final matches of the World Cup and European Championships from 1990 to 2014. We hypothesized that the efficiencies of the players during the games as expressed by activity, effectiveness and duel accuracy would be higher during defence than offense. Moreover, we assumed that according to minor level of fatigue the activity and duel accuracy will be higher during the early stages of the first and second halves of the match.

Methods

Subjects

Creating model characteristics of the game should be based on analyses of the most effective teams. Therefore, the research was conducted on a sample of the 1012 football players on teams that competed in the semi-finals, the finals and the third place matches during the Football World Cup and European Championships from 1990 to 2014. In total, the performances of 506 players in 1-on-1 situations during 46 matches that were terminated after the regulation 90 min were examined.

Study design

The observation method involved the use of an observation sheet. Prior to the study, the validity of the sheet was assessed. The assessments of the consistencies of the intra-rater reliabilities as expressed by the Kappa index yielded 0.96 for one expert and 0.93 for three experts. These findings indicate that the Kappa index were consistent and exhibited nearly perfect reliability.¹⁹

The data regarding the game were registered on an observation sheet while the audio-visual assessors analysed rebroadcast television transmissions with the use of a freeze-frame. The types of activities, their effects, and the places and times of their occurrences were registered. Moreover, the types of activities involving both players attempting to control the ball that occurred during the passing of the ball were divided (i.e. defensive duels, offensive duels, defensive head duels and offensive head duels). The duels for free balls, i.e. the activities related to surprising, accidentally occurring situations performed by both players without possession of the ball with the goal of taking control over it, were also registered. Head duels were differenced according to the possession of the ball prior to duel. The goalkeeper’s activities in 1-on-1 situations that occurred within his own penalty area when he could catch the ball with his hands were not included. Each game was divided into 15 min periods. All the activities performed in additional time of the first and second half were assigned to 30–45+ and 75–90+ periods, respectively.

The requirements of the study included the division of the field into three zones (attack, middle and defence zones) of 35 m each. Additionally, the middle zone was divided into two halves by the middle line, i.e. the own middle zone and the middle zone of the opponent (each was 17.5 m long). A zone of direct goal threat (DGT) was also set. This area was defined by lines between the goal poles and the corners of the penalty area. This zone extended beyond the penalty area by 25 m from the goal (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Duel accuracy of the performance in 1-on-1 situation in the zones of the field.

Statistical analyses

A statistical analysis was performed with the use of the R version 3.0.2 software.²⁰ The dispersion of the efficiency of the performance in the 1-on-1 situation was analysed with the Shapiro–Wilk test. The significances of the differences between the results acquired in the six field zones and in the separate time periods were examined with analyses of variance (ANOVAs) (for normally distributed data) or Friedman tests (for non-normally distributed data). When significance was identified in the ANOVA test, the Student’s t-test with the Bonferroni correction was calculated, and the Wilcoxon test with Bonferroni correction was implemented after the Friedman tests.

Results

Efficiency in 1-on-1 situations within the regular time of the game

Table 1 provides the results of 46 matches played during the finals of the World Cup and the European Championships in the years from 1990 to 2014. The players engaged in 10,635 duels in 1-on-1 situations (231 actions in an average match with a 52% duel accuracy). The mean numbers of defensive and offensive duels in winning teams were 100 and 97, respectively, in an average match. Thus, 43 and 42% of all the activities were performed in 1-on-1 situations. The highest duel accuracy was achieved in the defensive head duels (64%), and the lowest was observed in the offensive duels (34%). The players exhibited higher activity on defence (116 times) than on offense (113 times), and the defensive and offensive effectivenesses were 51 and 52%, respectively. Players from the losing teams were successful in 5269 1-on-1 duels with 49% accuracy. Considering offensive duels the activity of losing teams was higher, while the efficiency was lower (winning – 52%, losing – 50%). The accuracy of defensive duels was significantly lower in losing teams when compared with the winners (49 and 51%, respectively, Table 1). The results of the t-test for independent groups demonstrated that the efficiency of the winning teams was significantly higher (p = 0.027) than in losing teams (Table 2).

Table 1.

Offensive and defensive activity in 1-on-1 situations in the studied players of World Cups and European Championships in the years 1990–2014.

Type of activity 1-on-1	Index of effectiveness during 1-on-1 performance
	Activity (n)		Efficiency (n)		Duel accuracy (%)		Mean value of the number of activity
	L	W	L	W	L	W	L	W
Offensive duels 1-on-1	4591	4475	2393	2455	52	55	99.8	97.3
Offensive head duels 1-on-1	741	726	271	243	37	33	16.1	15.8
Defensive duels 1-on-1	4475	4591	2019	2198	45	48	97.3	99.8
Defensive head duels 1-on-1	726	741	484	470	67	63	15.8	16.1
Free ball duels 1-on-1	102	102	102	102	100	100	2.2	2.2
Total	10,635	10,635	5269	5468	49	51	231.2	231.2

L: losing teams; W: winning teams.

Table 2.

The activity, effectiveness and duel accuracy in the studied players participating in the World Cups and European Championships in the years 1990–2014.

Indexes of efficiency	Winning teams		Losing teams		p
Indexes of efficiency	X	sd	X	sd	p
Activity	231.20	21.48	231.20	21.48	1.000
Effectiveness	118.87	13.00	114.57	15.55	0.153
Duel accuracy	0.52	0.04	0.49	0.04	0.027*

Significant differences between the winning and losing teams at p ≤ 0.05.

Results presented in Table 3 show that effectiveness and duel accuracy in defence were significantly higher (p ≤ 0.05) in winning teams. Moreover, the level of duel accuracy in offence was significantly higher (p ≤ 0.05) in winning teams as well. Interestingly, it was observed that players from the losing teams had significantly higher (p ≤ 0.01) accuracy in offensive head duels.

Table 3.

The differences in 1-on-1 defensive and offensive performance of winning and losing teams.

Indexes of efficiency	Zone of the field	Winning teams		Losing teams		p
		Statistical values
		M	Q1–Q3	M	Q1–Q3
Activity	Offensive duels 1-on-1	99.5	84.25–106	98.5	91.25–110.25	0.571
	Offensive head duels 1-on-1	15.5	11–18.75	16	12–19	0.754
	Defensive duels 1-on-1	98	90.25–110.25	99.5	84.25–106	0.549
	Defensive head duels 1-on-1	16.5	12–19	15.5	11–18.75	0.485
Effectiveness	Offensive duels 1-on-1	52.5	44.75–62.75	49.5	44–58.75	0.531
	Offensive head duels 1-on-1	4.5	3–7	6	4–7	0.094
	Defensive duels 1-on-1	47.5	43.25–53	42.5	40–50	0.016*
	Defensive head duels 1-on-1	10	6.25–13	10	7–13	0.762
Duel accuracy	Offensive duels 1-on-1	54.80	50.12–59.33	52.15	47.89–55.96	0.050*
	Offensive head duels 1-on-1	30.38	20.77–39.72	37.8	30.89–42.11	0.004**
	Defensive duels 1-on-1	47.91	46.10–51.22	45.93	41.78–49.18	0.018*
	Defensive head duels 1-on-1	62.83	52.80–74.31	66.67	61.54–74.58	0.163

Q1 – lower quartile; Q3 – upper quartile; significant differences * p ≤ 0.05; ** p ≤ 0.01.

Efficiency in 1-on-1 situations in relation to the place of the duel

The accuracy of the 1-on-1 duels in winning teams decreased from the defensive zone (54%) to the attack zone (48%). In the DGT zone of the own field, the accuracy of the 1-on-1 duels was higher (55%) than that in the entire defence zone (54%). The duel accuracy in the opponent’s DGT zone was 46%, which was slightly lower than the total accuracy in the attack zone (48%; Table 4, Figure 1). Moreover, the players from the winning teams performed more 1-on-1 duels on their own half than on the opponent’s half of the pitch (5565 versus 5070, respectively). Duel accuracy in losing teams was lower when compared with winning teams regardless of the half of the pitch (own half: 52% versus 53%; opponent half 48% versus 50%, respectively).

Table 4.

Activity, effectiveness and duel accuracy in 1-on-1 game in elite winning and losing teams with reference to pitch zone.

Winning teams					Losing teams
Own half of the field
Indexes of efficiency				Zone of the field	Indexes of efficiency
A (n)	E (n)	R (%)	Total (%)	Zone of the field	A (n)	E (n)	R (%)	Total (%)
5565	2955	53	100	Total	5070	2605	52	100
2847	1527	54	51.2	Defence zone	2518	1328	53	49.7
2718	1428	53	48.8	Attack zone	2552	1277	50	50.3
1229	676	56	22.1	DGT	1203	651	54	23.7
Opponent’s half of the field
Indexes of efficiency					Indexes of efficiency
A (n)	E (n)	R (%)	Total (%)	Zone of the field	A (n)	E (n)	R (%)	Total (%)
5070	2513	50	100	Total	5565	2655	48	100
2552	1299	51	50.3	Defence zone	2718	1316	48	48.8
2518	1214	48	49.7	Attack zone	2847	1339	47	51.2
1203	558	46	23.7	DGT	1229	562	46	22.1

A: activity (n); DGT: the zone of the direct goal threat; E: effectiveness (n); R: duel accuracy (%]).

The accuracy of the duels in both winning and losing teams differs according to the pitch zone. The highest level was noted in defence zone (winning teams – 54%, losing teams – 53%), in middle zone duel accuracy decreased (52 and 49%, respectively) and the lowest level of this indicator was observed in the offense zone (48 and 47%, respectively).

A Student’s t-test revealed that the players forming the winning teams were significantly more active (p ≤ 0.05) and effective (p ≤ 0.01) in the defence zone and more effective (p ≤ 0.05) in the middle zone of their own half. The duel accuracy in the middle zone of the opponents’ half was higher in winning teams, although these differences did not reach the significance level (p ≤ 0.06–0.08). There were no significant differences with reference to other zones of the pitch (Table 5).

Table 5.

The differences in 1-on-1 performance in players from winning and losing teams.

Indexes of efficiency	Zone of the field	Winning teams		Losing teams		p
		Statistical values
		X	sd	X	sd
Activity	Defence zone	61.89	15.03	54.74	13.59	0.019*
	Own half middle zone	59.09	9.68	55.48	12.27	0.121
	DGT	26.72	9.28	26.15	9.62	0.775
	Opponents’ half middle zone	55.48	12.27	59.09	9.68	0.121
	Attack zone	54.74	13.59	61.89	15.03	0.019*
	DGT	26.15	9.62	26.72	9.28	0.775
Effectiveness	Defence zone	33.20	8.37	28.87	7.00	0.009**
	Own half middle zone	31.04	6.61	27.76	7.14	0.025*
	DGT	14.70	5.06	14.15	5.13	0.61
	Opponents’ half middle zone	28.24	6.67	28.61	6.66	0.791
	Attack zone	26.39	8.82	29.11	8.00	0.125
	DGT	12.13	5.29	12.22	4.92	0.935
Duel accuracy	Defence zone	54.08	7.50	53.27	7.22	0.596
	Own half middle zone	52.61	7.55	50.10	6.82	0.098
	DGT	56.13	9.89	55.78	11.38	0.874
	Opponents’ half middle zone	51.15	7.20	48.39	7.55	0.076
	Attack zone	47.87	9.17	47.13	7.97	0.681
	DGT	46.23	11.82	45.69	8.96	0.806

DGT: the zone of the direct goal threat; significant differences: * p ≤ 0.05; ** p ≤ 0.01.

Efficiency of the 1-on-1 performances in relation to the time in the game

The winning and losing teams engaged in 5384 1-on-1 duels during the first 45 min of the game (51% of total 1-on-1 duels), and there were 5251 duels during the second half of the game (49% of total 1-on-1 duels). No statistically significant differences were observed for the activities, effectivenesses or reliabilities of the players between the two halves of the match.

Duel accuracy in the players from the losing teams was lower in both the first (49%) and second (50%) half when compared with winning teams (51 and 52%, respectively). The results provided in Table 5 indicate that the numbers of 1-on-1 duels differed in the different 15 min time periods. The players were most active, effective and accurate during the first quarters of the first and second halves of the match. Statistical analysis (Student’s t-tests) revealed no significant differences in the efficiencies of the winning players between the time periods. Moreover, the duel accuracy in losing teams was lower in the first 60 min of the game. Only during the period between 60 and 75 min of the game players from the losing teams performed more successful 1-on-1 duels (Table 6).

Table 6.

A comparison of 1-on-1 performance in players from winning and losing teams.

Match time	0′–15′			15′–30′			30′–45′			45′–60′			60′–75′			75′–90′
1-on-1 duels	Indexes of efficiency
1-on-1 duels	A (n)	E (n)	R (%)	A (n)	E (n)	R (%)	A (n)	E (n)	R (%)	A (n)	E (n)	R (%)	A (n)	E (n)	R (%)	A (n)	E (n)	R (%)
Total winning teams	1859	985	53	1747	897	51	1778	903	51	1803	954	53	1647	822	50	1801	907	50
Total losing teams	1859	894	48	1747	868	50	1778	892	50	1803	866	48	1647	844	51	1801	905	50
Offense winning teams	942	496	53	828	431	52	886	450	51	866	479	55	796	393	49	883	449	51
Offense losing teams	897	428	48	901	453	50	875	439	50	920	462	50	832	422	51	907	460	51
Defence winning teams	897	469	52	901	448	50	875	436	50	920	458	50	832	410	49	907	447	49
Defence losing teams	942	446	47	828	397	48	886	436	49	866	387	45	796	403	51	883	434	49
Free ball duels	20	20	100	18	18	100	17	17	100	17	17	100	19	19	100	11	11	100

A: activity (n); E: effectiveness (n); R: duel accuracy (%).

Results presented in Table 7 show that players from winning teams were more effective and accurate during the first quarters of the first and second halves of the match than players from the losing teams. There were no significant differences between winning and losing teams in the other match periods.

Table 7.

The differences in 1-on-1 performance in players from winning and losing teams with reference to time of the game.

Indexes of efficiency	Match time	Winning teams		Losing teams		p
		Statistical values
		X	sd	X	sd
Activity	0′–15′	40.46	7.05	40.41	7.01	0.976
	15′–30′	37.98	6.52	37.98	6.52	1.000
	30′–45′	38.63	6.67	38.61	6.68	0.988
	45′–60′	39.20	8.03	39.22	8.01	0.990
	60′–75′	35.59	7.40	35.78	7.26	0.898
	75′–90′	38.96	8.89	39.11	8.94	0.935
Effectiveness	0′–15′	21.41	5.08	19.52	5.05	0.076
	15′–30′	19.50	4.30	18.87	4.75	0.507
	30′–45′	19.63	4.86	19.37	4.55	0.791
	45′–60′	20.74	5.67	18.89	4.85	0.097
	60′–75′	17.87	4.31	18.30	4.69	0.644
	75′–90′	19.70	5.17	19.65	6.11	0.971
Duel accuracy [%]	0′–15′	52.98	9.26	48.35	9.67	0.021*
	15′–30′	51.50	8.34	49.54	8.38	0.264
	30′–45′	50.79	9.62	50.25	9.13	0.784
	45′–60′	52.83	8.99	48.26	8.47	0.014*
	60′–75′	50.48	7.97	51.06	7.79	0.721
	75′–90′	50.80	8.72	50.03	8.56	0.671

Significant differences: * p ≤ 0.05.

Discussion

Success in a football match is determined by both effective individual performances and the entire team’s cooperation. This study analysed the individual performances in 1-on-1 situations of 1012 players for elite that compete in the semi-finals and finals or finished in the third position in the World Cup or European Championships from 1990 to 2014.

This study demonstrated that during single matches, the players from winning teams performed an average of 231 times in 1-on-1 situations with 52% duel accuracy, while in losing teams only 49% of the duels was successful. Winners competed with similar frequencies on defence (114 duels on average with 51% efficiency) and attack (113 duels on average with 52% efficiency). Duel accuracy in players from losing teams was lower in both offensive (50%) and defensive (49%) actions.

The research of other authors is consistent with our results. Szwarc et al.¹¹ found that the players who competed in the Champions League performed 200–270 duels for the ball with 50% accuracy. Moreover, Szwarc et al.¹¹ revealed that the Spanish footballers in the European (2008) and World Cup championships (2010) performed 226 individual duels on average with a high efficiency of 56% in each of the 13 final matches. A similarly high duel accuracy of 56% (ranging from 50.5 to 65.5% depending on position) was observed in the duels of the French First League players in all matches during the 2005/2006 season by Dellal et al.¹³ Moreover, Dellal et al.¹⁴ studied English football players in the Premier League and found that during the 2006/2007 season, they performed 228 duels on average (160 ground duels and 68 head duels), and the frequency of the occurrence of the duels was not different from that of the Spanish La Liga players.

The results of studies by Oberstone,¹ Almeida et al.,² Liu et al.¹⁷ and other authors have revealed that the winning teams generally exhibit greater effectiveness on defence than teams in lower positions. The results of our study are in line with these findings. Moreover, we observed that duel accuracy in players from winning teams is significantly higher in offense when compared with losing teams. Only in offensive head duels players from losing teams were more successful. Despite the fact that the players studied in our research exhibited a similar overall duel accuracy in 1-on-1 situations, in the defensive head duels, they exhibited considerably greater duel accuracy than in the offensive duels (63 and 33%, respectively), and when the ground duels were considered, their accuracy was slightly higher on offense than on defence (55 and 48%, respectively).

The main goal of defensive performances is to take over the ball or kick it out when taking possession is impossible. Liu et al.⁶ and Vogelbein et al.³ confirmed the above supposition and claimed that the probability of success increases with duel accuracy in tackling the ball. Nic²¹ says that a low number of successful defensive tackles may contribute to a high number of conceded goals. Similarly, Shafizadeh et al.⁵ found that the top teams in the European Championships in 2012 (i.e. Spain, Germany, England) were more effective in tackling or kicking the ball out than the other teams. Our previous results based on Spanish footballers also agree with the above observations.¹¹

Taken together, our results and other relevant findings suggest that the players of successful teams exhibit high reliabilities of over 50% in 1-on-1 situations and are more effective in individual defensive performances than losing team players.

Our research revealed that the accuracy of the players in 1-on-1 duels is highest on their own half of the field (i.e. the defence zone), especially in the DGT zone, and decreases with distance from the own goal towards the opponents’ goal. Moreover, the accuracy of duels is considerably higher in the own half of the middle zone than in the opponents’ half. Regardless of the pitch zone the duel accuracy was higher in players from the winning teams. These findings suggest that the winners pay close attention to successful defence not only on their own half of the field. Barriera et al.²² studied 1619 1-on-1 duels in 24 matches of the World Championship in 2010 and confirmed that the activity and effectiveness of ball tackling in the middle zone significantly differentiated the winners from the losers. Our results are in line with the findings of Lago-Ballesteros et al.,²³ O’Donoghue,¹⁶ and Liu et al.⁶ who claim that an aggressive defence provides more opportunities for counterattack and thus more opportunities to score a goal. Therefore, these authors confirm the fact that ‘offensive defence’ (i.e. which can be understood as the immediate effort to tackle the ball, taking the field and creating situations for goal scoring), especially in the middle zone of the field, is typical of the football players of the best teams.^2,18,24–26

Our findings revealed that the players of successful teams exhibit high levels of activity in their offensive performances during the early stages of both halves of the match (the first 15 min of the game). Similarly, Harper et al.²⁷ revealed that the highest dribbling activity (in 1-on-1 situations) during these time periods also had the lowest performance duel accuracy. Moreover, our results suggest that winners exhibit the highest individual accuracy on offense during the first 15 min of both halves of the match, and the highest levels on defence occur during the first 15 min of the match. High efficiency on offense was also observed during the last 15 min of each half of the match when the greatest number of goals is scored. However, these periods were extended due to additional time of the game. This fact is an obvious limitation that could provide inappropriate data. Armatas et al.²⁸ and Leite²⁹ studied the frequency of goals scored/15 min in the World Cup and European Championships and found that the players score the greatest number of goals during the last 15 min period. Therefore, we suggest that a high performance of duel accuracy during the last stages of a match is typical of successful teams. Furthermore, our study demonstrated that winners exhibit the highest activity in 1-on-1 duels near both goals (their own and their opponents). However, the accuracy reaches its highest level in both the attack and opponent DGT zones (56 and 57%, respectively). Although the duel accuracy of the losing team increases during the game, it is still lower than in winning teams. Only between 60 and 75 min of the match higher accuracy of the duels in losing teams was registered. Our results confirm that performance aimed at changing the match results predicts success when players with high-level motor abilities are involved and is thus a significant factor of success.^7,13,29–32

Conclusion

The results of our study confirm our hypothesis. The players of elite winning teams exhibit higher efficiency in the performance in 1-on-1 duels than players from the losing teams. These differences are especially evident on their own half of the field and during the early stages of both halves of the match. The efficiency of the performance decreases when the actions are moved closer to the opponent’s goal and with the time in the game.

We consider the results of this study to be highly applicable not only for the coaches of elite teams but also for the coaches and players of youth teams, amateurs and semi-professionals. Practicing effective performance in 1-on-1 situations not only within the defence zone and during the early stages of both halves of the match but also during the entire match and in zones of the field can provide a new method for achieving sports success in the future. We are aware that there are some limitations related to the small number of analysed matches from each tournament. However, we decided to focus only on the top teams from each tournament. The selection of these matches ensured that both teams represent the absolutely elite level. In our opinion, future studies should investigate the reliabilities in 1-on-1 duels during matches between teams that represent different levels of competition. Analysing the effectiveness in 1-on-1 duels of winning and losing teams in group and play-off phases could be highly applicable. Such data could confirm the importance of efficiency in 1-on-1 situations. Moreover, if further research involves data from the latest tournaments, it will be possible to identify the most recent trends in offensive and defensive behaviours in soccer.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Oberstone

. Differentiating the top English premier league football clubs a from the rest of the pack: identifying the keys to success. J Quant Anal Sports 2009; 5: 1–29.

Almeida

Ferreira

Volossovitch

. Effects of match location, match status and quality of opposition on regaining possession in UEFA champions league. J Hum Kinet 2014; 41: 203–214.

Vogelbein

Nopp

Hökelmann

. Defensive transition in soccer-are prompt possession regains a measure of success? A quantitative analysis of German Fußball-Bundesliga 2010/2011. J Sports Sci 2014; 32: 1076–1083.

Hossini

Rezae

Masuodi

et al.

Effectiveness of types of individual defense performance in achieving success. Int Res J Appl Basic Sci 2012; 3: 891–895.

Shafizadeh

Taylor

Lago Peńas

. Performance consistency of international soccer teams in Euro 2012: a time series analysis. J Hum Kinet 2013; 30: 213–226.

Liu

Gomez

Lago-Peñas

et al.

Match statistics related to winning in the group stage of 2014 Brazil FIFA World Cup. J Sports Sci 2015; 33: 1205–1213.

Rampinini

Impellizzeri

Castagna

et al.

Technical performance during soccer matches of the Italian Serie A League: effect of fatigue and competitive level. J Sci Med Sport 2009; 12: 227–233.

Sarmento

Marcelino

Anguera

et al.

Match analysis in football: a systematic review. J Sports Sci 2014; 32: 1831–1843.

Gerisch

Reichelt

Computer – and video – aided analysis of football games. In: Reilly

Clarys

Stribbe

(eds). Science and football II, London: EFN SPON, 1993, pp. 167–173.

10.

Loy R. Zur diagnostik taktischer leistungen im sportspiel [On diagnostics of tactical achievement in sport games]. PhD Thesis, Universität Duisburg, Germany, 2005.

11.

Szwarc

Kromke

Lipińska

. The efficiency of football players in one against one game in the aspect of situational factors of a sports fight. Arch Budo 2012; 2: 1–12.

12.

Sarmento

Leitão

Anguera

et al.

Observational methodology in football: development of an instrument to study the offensive game in football. Motricidade 2009; 5: 19–24.

13.

Dellal

Wong

Moalla

et al.

Physical and technical activity of soccer players in the French First League – with special reference to their playing position. Int SportMed J 2010; 11: 278–290.

14.

Dellal

Chamari

Wong

et al.

Comparison of physical and technical performance in European professional soccer match-play: the FA Premier League and La Liga. Eur J Sports Sci 2011; 11: 51–59.

15.

Castellano

Casamichana

Lago

. The use of match statistics that discriminate between successful and unsuccessful soccer teams. J Hum Kinet 2012; 31: 139–147.

16.

O’Donoghue

. Factors influencing the accuracy of predictions of the 2014 FIFA World Cup. Int J Comp Sci Sport 2014; 13: 32–49.

17.

Liu

Giménez

et al.

Performance profiles of football teams in the UEFA Champions League considering situational efficiency. Int J Perf Anal Sport 2015; 15: 371–390.

18.

Szwarc

. The efficiency model of soccer player’s actions in cooperation with other team players at the FIFA World Cup. Hum Mov 2008; 9: 56–61.

19.

Landis

Koch

. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33: 150–174.

20.

R Development Core Team. A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2009, http://www.R-project.org (accessed 10 October 2016).

21.

Nic

. Notational analysis in soccer: past, present and future. Int J Perf Anal Sport 2006; 6: 67–81.

22.

Barreira

Garganta

Guimaraes

et al.

Ball recovery patterns as a performance indicator in elite soccer. J Sports Eng Tech 2014; 228: 61–72.

23.

Lago-Ballesteros

Lago-Peñas

Rey

. The effect of playing tactics and situational variables on achieving score-box possessions in a professional soccer team. J Sports Sci 2012; 30: 1455–1461.

24.

O’Donoghue

. The effectiveness of satisfying the assumptions of predictive modelling techniques: an exercise in predicting the FIFA World Cup 2006. Int J Comp Sci Sports 2006; 5: 5–16.

25.

Gómez

Gómez-Lopez

Lago

et al.

Effects of game location and final outcome on game related statistics in each zone of the pitch in professional football. Eur J Sport Sci 2012; 12: 393–398.

26.

Wallace

Norton

. Evolution of World Cup soccer final games 1966–2010: game structure, speed and play patterns. J Sci Med Sport 2014; 17: 223–228.

27.

Harper

West

Stevenson

et al.

Technical performance reduces during the extra-time period of professional soccer match-play. PLoS One 2014; 9: 1–6.

28.

Armatas

Yiannakos

Sileloglou

. Relationship between time and goal scoring in soccer games: analysis of three world cups. Int J Perf Anal Sport 2007; 7: 48–58.

29.

Leite

. Euro 2012: analysis and evaluation of goals scored. Int J Sports Sci 2013; 3: 102–106.

30.

Reilly

Motion analysis and physiological demands. In: Williams

Reilly

(eds). Science and soccer, London: Routledge, 2003, pp. 59–72.

31.

Carling

Dupont

. Are declines in physical performance associated with a reduction in skill-related performance during professional soccer match-play? J Sports Sci 2011; 29: 63–71.

32.

Russell

Benton

Kingsley

. The effects of fatigue on soccer skills performed during a soccer match simulation. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2011; 6: 221–233.