Gaudion, Sarah L., Doma, Kenji, Sinclair, Wade, Banyard, Harry B., and Woods, Carl T. (2017) Identifying the physical fitness, anthropometric and athletic movement qualities discriminant of developmental level in elite junior Australian football: implications for the development of talent. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 31 (7). pp. 1830-1839.

Preview	PDF (Accepted Publisher Version) - Accepted Version Download (303kB) | Preview
	PDF (Published Version) - Published Version Restricted to Repository staff only

 

21

1186

Abstract

This study aimed to identify the physical fitness, anthropometric and athletic movement qualities discriminant of developmental level in elite junior Australian football (AF). From a total of 77 players, two groups were defined according to their developmental level; under 16 (U16) (n = 40, 15.6 to 15.9 y), and U18 (n = 37, 17.1 to 17.9 y). Players performed a test battery consisting of seven physical fitness assessments, two anthropometric measurements, and a fundamental athletic movement assessment. A multivariate analysis of variance tested the main effect of developmental level (two levels: U16, U18) on the assessment criterions, whilst binary logistic regression models and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were built to identify the qualities most discriminant of developmental level. A significant effect of developmental level was evident on nine of the assessments (d = 0.27 – 0.88; P <0.05). However, it was a combination of body mass, dynamic vertical jump height (non-dominant leg), repeat sprint time and score on the 20 m multistage fitness test that provided the greatest association with developmental level (AICc = 80.84). The ROC curve was maximised with a combined score of 180.7, successfully discriminating 89% and 60% of the U18 and U16 players, respectively (area under the curve = 79.3%). These results indicate that there are distinctive physical fitness and anthropometric qualities discriminant of developmental level within the junior AF talent pathway. Coaches should consider these differences when designing training interventions at the U16 level to assist with the development of prospective U18 AF players.

Actions (Repository Staff Only)

Item Control Page