Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Series Title
      Series Title
      Clear All
      Series Title
  • Reading Level
      Reading Level
      Clear All
      Reading Level
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Content Type
    • Item Type
    • Is Full-Text Available
    • Subject
    • Publisher
    • Source
    • Donor
    • Language
    • Place of Publication
    • Contributors
    • Location
207 result(s) for "Australian rules football"
Sort by:
Optionality in Australian Football League draftee contracts
Though player drafts have commonly been utilised to equitably disperse amateur talent and avoid bidding wars, often they have also been accused of creating a monopsony labour market which restricts player movement. Within the Australian Football League (AFL) some have called for the increase of the initial draftee contract from two to three seasons, which further pushes the envelope on monopsony power. Instead of increasing the contract length, this paper suggests a call option to be purchased by the teams allowing them to add a further season to the draftee contract at a predetermined compensation package should they choose to do so at the end of the initial contract. The call prices per pick were calculated using the Black-Scholes model and were valued between 1% and 1.5% of the pick value. However, it failed to follow a monotonic function similar to pick value, owing to managerial overconfidence and sunk investment plays. Overall, the findings allow teams to procure the option of increasing initial draftee contracts and not impede further on a player’s ability to move.
Valuing Australian football league draft picks
To ensure uncertainty in match outcomes, professional sporting leagues have used various competitive balance policies, including player salary caps, revenue sharing among teams and player drafts. The Australian Football League (AFL) introduced a player draft in 1986, and to refine its operation, a draft value index (DVI) was introduced in 2015. The DVI allocates a numeric value to each individual player draft pick, with these values determined by the AFL using historic player compensation or wage and salary data. The AFL DVI plays an essential role in the operation of its player draft; however, other research has questioned the validity of such indexes. This paper aims to produce an alternative to the AFL DVI. The former index uses career compensation as the determinant of value, whereas we use other measures of player performance. First, various models were developed to predict on-field performance, such as games played (both in a recruit’s career and season) after a draftee was selected for the first time by a team. This was then retrofitted to the pick used to select these draftees to create the new DVIs. Even though the predicted DVI followed an inverse monotonic function like the existing index, the decline in value for the DVI produced here was less steep, unlike the AFL’s. This allowed us to conclude that players’ salaries did not always strongly correlate to performance. The change in performance between players selected at different points in the draft did not vary as much as their wages. Though this scheme is applied to the AFL, the underlying concept could be directly exported to other player drafts.
The influence of lightweight wearable resistance on whole body coordination during sprint acceleration among Australian Rules football players
Rapid acceleration is an important quality for field-based sport athletes. Technical factors contribute to acceleration and these can be deliberately influenced by coaches through implementation of constraints, which afford particular coordinative states or induce variability generally. Lightweight wearable resistance is an emerging training tool, which can act as a constraint on acceleration. At present, however, the effects on whole body coordination resulting from wearable resistance application are unknown. To better understand these effects, five male Australian Rules football athletes performed a series of 20 m sprints with either relatively light or heavy wearable resistance applied to the anterior or posterior aspects of the thighs or shanks. Whole body coordination during early acceleration was examined across eight wearable resistance conditions and compared with baseline (unresisted) acceleration coordination using group- and individual-level hierarchical cluster analysis. Self-organising maps and a joint-level distance matrix were used to further investigate specific kinematic changes in conditions where coordination differed most from baseline. Across the group, relatively heavy wearable resistance applied to the thighs resulted in the greatest difference to whole body coordination compared with baseline acceleration. On average, heavy posterior thigh wearable resistance led to altered pelvic position and greater hip extension, while heavy anterior thigh wearable resistance led to accentuated movement at the shoulders in the transverse and sagittal planes. These findings offer a useful starting point for coaches seeking to use wearable resistance to promote adoption of greater hip extension or upper body contribution during acceleration. Importantly, individuals varied in how they responded to heavy thigh wearable resistance, which coaches should be mindful of.
Quantifying congestion with player tracking data in Australian football
With 36 players on the field, congestion in Australian football is an important consideration in identifying passing capacity, assessing fan enjoyment, and evaluating the effect of rule changes. However, no current method of objectively measuring congestion has been reported. This study developed two methods to measure congestion in Australian football. The first continuously determined the number of players situated within various regions of density at successive time intervals during a match using density-based clustering to group players as ‘primary’, ‘secondary’, or ‘outside’. The second method aimed to classify the level of congestion a player experiences (high, nearby, or low) when disposing of the ball using the Random Forest algorithm. Both approaches were developed using data from the 2019 and 2021 Australian Football League (AFL) regular seasons, considering contextual variables, such as field position and quarter. Player tracking data and match event data from professional male players were collected from 56 matches performed at a single stadium. The random forest model correctly classified disposals in high congestion (0.89 precision, 0.86 recall, 0.96 AUC) and low congestion (0.98 precision, 0.86 recall, 0.96 AUC) at a higher rate compared to disposals nearby congestion (0.72 precision, 0.88 recall, 0.88 AUC). Overall, both approaches enable a more efficient method to quantify the characteristics of congestion more effectively, thereby eliminating manual input from human coders and allowing for a future comparison between additional contextual variables, such as, seasons, rounds, and teams.
Compounding endowment effects when trading draft picks in the Australian Football League
Endowment effect relates to a situation when decision makers are more likely to retain an object they own, than acquire the same object when they do not own it. Studies have often concluded that players recruited early on through drafts are more likely to be held in team rosters irrespective of their marginal utility. We tested the hypothesis wherein this effect would compound when the pick used to select a player is traded between teams. Using a sample of draftees selected between 2003 and 2016 in the Australian Football League, we created a proportional hazard model to predict the career longevity of a player with their drafting team and overall career. The results suggest each subsequent trade marginally reduced the exit of a player by a log normal rate of 0.269 in their career with the team that initially drafted them. The findings were attributed to the premium requested by the original team that is compounded with every exchange as the reference points used to determine value have also shifted with the trade.
Predicting successful draft outcome in Australian Rules football: Model sensitivity is superior in neural networks when compared to logistic regression
Using logistic regression and neural networks, the aim of this study was to compare model performance when predicting player draft outcome during the 2021 AFL National Draft. Physical testing, in-game movement and technical involvements were collected from 708 elite-junior Australian Rules football players during consecutive seasons. Predictive models were generated using data from 465 players (2017 to 2020). Data from 243 players were then used to prospectively predict the 2021 AFL National Draft. Logistic regression and neural network models were compared for specificity, sensitivity and accuracy using relative cut-off thresholds from 5% to 50%. Using factored and unfactored data, and a range of relative cut-off thresholds, neural networks accounted for 73% of the 40 best performing models across positional groups and data configurations. Neural networks correctly classified more drafted players than logistic regression in 88% of cases at draft rate (15%) and convergence threshold (35%). Using individual variables across thresholds, neural networks (specificity = 79 ± 13%, sensitivity = 61 ± 24%, accuracy = 76 ± 8%) were consistently superior to logistic regression (specificity = 73 ± 15%, sensitivity = 29 ± 14%, accuracy = 66 ± 11%). Where the goal is to identify talented players with draft potential, model sensitivity is paramount, and neural networks were superior to logistic regression.