3.9 Article

Match-Related Statistics Differentiating Winning and Losing Teams at the 2019 Africa Cup of Nations Soccer Championship

Journal

FRONTIERS IN SPORTS AND ACTIVE LIVING
Volume 4, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fspor.2022.807198

Keywords

team performance; tactics; statistics; counter-attacks; shots

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study analyzed game-related statistics from the 2019 AFCON soccer tournament and found that winning teams performed better in terms of shots, shots on target, and shots from counter-attacks. Variables such as shots on target, shots, fouls, total passes, and yellow cards had the highest discriminatory power. These findings provide valuable guidance for coaches to improve their team's chances of winning the AFCON championship.
This study investigated game-related statistics differentiating the winning and losings teams of matches during the 2019 African Cup of Nations (AFCON) soccer tournament. The sample consisted of 38 games, with the data obtained from the InStat Scout platform. Data were analyzed using mean (M), SD, effect size (ES), structure coefficients (SCs), and the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The results showed that the winning teams performed significantly better than the losing teams in terms of shots (M = 12.13, SD = 4.67, Z = -2.26, ES = 0.62), shots on target (M = 5.05, SD = 2.54, Z = -4.22, ES = 1.13), and shots from counter-attacks (M = 2.24, SD = 1.42, Z = -2.48, ES = 0.57). Shots on target (SC = 1.22), shots (SC = -0.73), fouls (SC = 0.60), total passes (SC = 0.44), and yellow cards (SC = -0.32) presented the highest discriminatory power. These findings highlight the key match performance variables which influence the game results and may assist coaches in developing and implementing team strategies to improve the likelihood of winning the AFCON championship.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available