Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Research (AJMR)
2015
2015
E-ISSN: 2395-1702 P-ISSN: 2395-0382
Volume 01- Issue 08-, pp-07-10
www.yadavapublication.com
Research Paper
ANALYSIS OF FIELD GOAL AND PENALTY CORNER IN HERO HOCKEY INDIA
LEAGUE - 2013
Dr.P.Rajinikumar
Assistant Professor
Department of Exercise Physiology and Biomechanics
Tamil Nadu Physical Education and Sports University, Chennai-127
[email protected]
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to analyze the success and failure of field goal, penalty corner in
the Hero Hockey India League I Round in 2013, which was held in the different states namely
Delhi, Mumbai, Mohali, Ranchi and Lucknow, India. Five teams participated in this tournament
namely, Delhi Wave Riders, Mumbai Magicians, Ranchi Rhinos, Punjab Warriors and Uttar
Pradesh Wizards. All the matches were downloaded from the YouTube and only 10 matches
were analyzed in this tournament. The data were collected through video observation and only
the success and failure of field goals and penalty corners were analyzed. There were totally 38
goals scored in the ten matches (22 goals from field goal, 15 goals from penalty corner and only
1 goal from penalty stroke). The results showed that most successful goals scored from field goal
variations. The analysis showed that 59% of goals were scored through field goals, 38.5% of
goals were scored through penalty corner and only 2.75% of goals were scored through penalty
stroke. It is recommended that teams should give special need to practice the field goal variation
and penalty corner drag flick technique.
Keywords: Field Hockey, Analysis, Penalty Corner and Drag Flick
Introduction
Hockey is the national
game of India. Its status is based on the
assumption that it is the most popular game
in our country. In modern hockey, there has
been a growth in number of set plays
performed during a game. In this game
players attempt to score goals by hitting,
pushing or flicking the ball with hockey
sticks into the opposing team's goal. In field
hockey the Penalty Corner was introduced in
1908 for offences by defenders in the circle
and the rules have been amended from time
to time (Hussian, 2012). The penalty corner
www.yadavapublication.com
allows a team to gain possession of the ball
near goal and thus carry out a set play on
goal. In the simplest terms, this entails one
player pushing ball in from the baseline to
another standing at the top of the circle who
stops it. A third person waiting behind the
„stopper‟ then hits or drags the ball at goal.
During the 1994 World Cup in Sydney the
drag flick was used 79 times out of 360
penalty corners compared to the hit 107
times. The drag flick produced the same
number of goals (14) as the more popular
hit, so it was more successful by comparison
(17.1% compared to 13.1%) (McLaughlin,
Page 7
Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Research (AJMR)
1997). In this study, 15 goals scored 2015
from 67
opportunities (13 from 54 with penalty
corner drag flick). The drag flick was used
54 times out of 67 penalty corners. Two
hundred and fifty penalty corners from the
1998 field hockey World Cup in Holland
were analyzed by Laird and Sutherland in
2003. The results showed that most
successful goals scored at penalty corners
were from drag flick. The drag-flick is
between 1.4 and 2.7 times more efficient
than hitting or push-shooting the ball
towards the goal when playing a penalty
corner
(Yusoff,
2008).
To
retain the advantage on penalty corners,
teams need to practice a number of penalty
corner attack variation. Data from the World
Cup in Sydney show that only 60 goals were
scored from 369 penalty corners taken a
success rate of 15.2% (Glencross, 1985).
The average success rate for teams
converting penalty corners to goals at the
1994 World Cup in Sydney was 15.2%, with
the most successful team conversion rate
32%. The Upright style appears to have an
advantage for generating ball speed due to
Teams
Delhi Wave
Riders
Mumbai
Magicians
Ranchi Rhinos
Punjab Warriors
Uttar Pradesh
Wizards
Overall
2015
the greater stick displacement (distance over
which force can be applied to the ball) of the
Upright (1.27 m) compared to the Low style
(0.67 m) (Yusoff, 2008). The purpose of
the study was to analyse the conversation of
goals from field goals, penalty corner and
penalty stroke in the Hero Hockey India
League 2013.
Methodology
Five teams participated in the Hero Hockey
India League in 2013. They were Delhi
Wave Riders, Mumbai Magicians, Ranchi
Rhinos, Punjab Warriors and Uttar Pradesh
Wizards. Sixty Seven penalty corners were
analyzed from 10 matches in this
tournament through match observation
method. The entire matches were
downloaded from YouTube. Investigator
observed all the matches and collected the
data from each video clips. This study
analyzed the numbers of goals converted
from field goal, penalty corner scores and
penalty stroke in field hockey.
Table - I
Success and failure data of field goal for all the matches
Success and Failure of Field Goals
Circle
Shots
Success
Failure Percentage Percentage
Penetration
(No. of
of Success
of Success
attempts)
83
48
6
42
12.5%
87%
65
53
2
51
3.77%
96.23%
62
64
52
33
54
38
7
4
3
25
50
35
21.21%
7.41%
7.89%
78.79%
92.59%
92.11%
326
226
22
203
10.56%
89.34%
www.yadavapublication.com
Page 8
Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Research (AJMR)
2015
Table I indicates that analyzed the 2015
number
was some better for the conversions of field
of circle penetration, Number of shots,
goal. Uttar Pradesh Wizard scored only
success and failure of field goal in the ten
7.89% of goals scored from field goals.
matches. Delhi Wave Riders penetrated into
Mumbai Magicians took more number of
the circle for 83 times in the four matches,
attempts to convert the field goal, but it
but it was one of the determining factors to
converted successfully only 3.77% of goals
score six goals. Ranchi Rhinos penetrated to
from field goals remain 96.23% of goals
the circle for 64 times and converted 7 field
failed to convert. It was the maximum level
goals in the four matches. Utter Pradesh
of failure for the field goal conversions in
penetrated into the circle for 52 times and
this
tournament.
Overall
successful
scored only three goals. Hence, circle
conversation of field goal for all the teams
penetration is also one of the goal scoring
was 50.56% (22 field goals scored out of
weapons. Ranchi Rhinos had the highest
226 attempts). So that this data is very
level of 21.21% of goals converted from
essential to reduce the maximum number of
field goal compared to other four teams, it
failures from the conversions of field goal.
Table - II
Success and failure data of penalty corner for all the matches
Success and failure of Penalty Corners
Teams
No.of
Success
Failure
Percentage of Percentage of
Attempts
Success
Failure
18
4
14
22.22%
77.78%
Delhi Wave
Riders
16
6
10
37.5%
62.5%
Mumbai
Magicians
13
3
9
23.08%
76.92%
Ranchi
Rhinos
10
10
0%
100%
Punjab
Warriors
10
2
8
20%
80%
Uttar
Pradesh
Wizards
67
15
52
16.36%
83.64%
Overall
100.00%
80.00%
60.00%
40.00%
20.00%
0.00%
Field Goal Success
www.yadavapublication.com
Uttar Pradesh
Punjab
Ranchi
Mumbai
Delhi
Field Goal Failure
Penalty Corner Success
Penalty Corner Failure
Page 9
Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Research (AJMR)
2015
Diagram 1: Success and failure percentage
of Field Goal and Penalty Corner for all the
2015
teams
Table II shows that Mumbai
rectify the failures of conservation of field
Magicians was successfully converted
goals and penalty corners.
37.5% of goals (6 goals scored out of 16
attempts) from penalty corners, but it was
References
having the lowest percentage of goals scored
1. Glencross, D (1985). 100 Hockey Tips.
from penalty corner situations. Ranchi
Rigby, Australia
Rhinos was the second highest level of goal
2. Hussain Ikram (2012) Biomechanical Study
conversions from penalty corner was 30% (3
on Drag Flick in field Hockey: International
goals from 13 attempts). Delhi Wave Riders
Journal of Behavioral Social and Movement
converted 22.22% of goal from penalty
Science. Vol.01. Issue03.
corners (4 goals from 14 attempts). Punjab
3. Laird, P., and Sutherland, P. (2003). Penalty
Warriors failed to convert the entire penalty
corners in field hockey: A guide to success.
corners in the four matches. Uttar Pradesh
4. Intenational Journal of Performance
Wizard scored only 20% of goals 2 goals out
Analysis in Sport. P. 19-26.
of 10 chances) from penalty corner drag
5. McLaughlin, P. (1997) Three- dimensional
flick. Overall average rate of successful
biomechanical analysis of the hockey drag
conversation of goal at penalty corner for all
flick: Full report. Belconnen, A.C.T.,
the teams was 16.36% (15 goals scored out
Australia: Australian Sports Commission.
of 67 attempts in the penalty corners).
6. Yusoff, S., Hasan, N. and Wilson, B. (2008)
Hence, “the ability to score from penalty
Tree-dimensional biomechanical analysis of
corners can be the determining factor in
the Hockey drag flick performed in
winning a match” (Laird & Sutherland,
competition. ISN Bulletin, National Sport
Institute of Malaysia. P. 34-35.
2003).
Conclusion
The 59% of goals were scored
through field goals, 38.5%of goals scored in
penalty corner and 2.5% of goals scored
through penalty stroke. In the Hero Hockey
India League First Round 2013, 34.5% of
goals were converted from drag flick
techniques and only 04% goals successfully
converted through other variations like
deflection and slipping shot during the
penalty corner situations. There was
maximum number of drag flicks taken
towards the goal than other techniques
(34.5% compared to 04%). The 59% of
goals converted from field goal by using
different goal scoring techniques. This study
was specially concentrated to analysis the
ball possessions of the teams. This study is
very helpful to analysis every matches and
www.yadavapublication.com
Page 10