A Kinematic Analysis of a Dominant Versus a Non-Dominant Leg Football Kick - Lab Report Example

A kinematic analysis of a dominant versus non-dominant leg football kick Introduction An optoelectronic camera system allows fast identification of markers and gaining of quantitative data. This process is fast and allows the collection of many trials, variables, and participants recorded at a high sampling rate in hertz. The most desirable skill in football players is the ability to kick a ball with both feet[ CITATION Dav00 \l 1033 ]. Most of the speed is generated through knee extension therefore so as to increase the velocity before contact with the ball there is need to increase the range of motion. The biological model of foot preference and performance as well as demonstrating the importance for studies of lateral asymmetries. In this research, two groups are involved. In the first one, it is the ROM/joint flexion while the other group involves timing of the technique. [ CITATION Car01 \l 1033 ]. This experiment was aimed to gain an understanding of how kinematic data can be acquired using an online optoelectronic system. The multi-camera system should be set up and the appropriate anatomical landmarks for marker placement for a saggital plane football kick. The qualitative data was gained from the previous lab sessions. Materials and method 6 x OQUS cameras (tripods and cables) 1 x computer with QTM software Retro-reflective markers Marker tape Football Procedure The participants were identified and each was given a consent form. The number of markers and their location should be decided. The plane of movement and the variables that are selected should be considered. The markers should be placed on the anatomical locations on the participant and ball by taping. The class should discuss where to place the six cameras to capture the activity by considering the plane of movement and the marker locations. In order to know the number of cameras that need to see one marker at any one time to reconstruct that markers in 3D position, the cameras in the lab in the general locations for capture should be positioned. The cameras should then be linked the cameras with the cables in a chain with the first camera linked to the computer. An additional power source is needed for the fourth camera in the chain. Turn on the power. The software layout is is in camera view in different windows. The sampling rate in Hz and exposure time are the camera parameters. During calibration the calibration frame should be placed in the centre of the capture volume that is the L frame and dynamic frame. The camera heights and the tilt should be adjusted. The cameras should be able to view the four points of the calibration frame and the highest marker on the participant and ensure that the calibration frame is at the bottom of the screen. The participants should be brought in to check if the cameras can see all markers throughout the movement of interest before calibration. The static and dynamic recording are used to calibrate the system and the calibration results checked. Record the trials of five successful kicks per participants. The subjects should be swabbed over and the files saved for analysis and labeled by the group day and time. Results Left foot Participant Hip ROM Knee ROM Ankle ROM Hip Flex Knee Flex Ankle Flex 1 72 78 70 95 106 86 2 75 90 69 71 95 88 3 78 87 72 81 92 90 4 69 81 70 88 100 87 5 78 80 69 83 102 84 6 69 79 71 75 94 83 7 67 71 75 84 98 86 8 70 75 69 85 91 84 9 65 78 70 86 104 90 10 72.468 91.3683 64.178 71.294 116.43 67.398 Mean 71.5468 81.03683 69.9178 81.9294 99.843 84.5398 SD 4.411665 6.527617 2.724949 7.605324 7.715053 6.486846 Right foot Participant Hip ROM O Knee ROMO Ankle ROM O Hip Flex Knee Flex Ankle Flex 1 62 68 66 85 90 84 2 69 70 65 86 95 86 3 54 79 60 82 94 79 4 59 80 69 84 93 80 5 64 75 70 82 90 82 6 66 73 75 72 86 84 7 61 69 68 78 88 83 8 63 72 76 80 84 81 9 70 67 64 82 83 84 10 52.236 111.56 69.67 93.55 113.026 76.876 Mean 66.0236 76.456 68.267 82.455 91.6028 81.9876 SD 10.32969 13.09552 4.865708 5.581042 8.560887 2.773963 Peak velocities (m/s) Left foot Participant Shoulder Velocity Hip Velocity Knee velocity Ankle velocity Foot velocity Ball velocity 1 1.95 2.56 6.12 9.23 12.32 21.89 2 1.96 2.87 5.98 9.12 11.50 22.01 3 1.87 3.12 5.78 11.22 12.54 22.15 4 1.77 3.01 5.96 10.12 11.87 21.97 5 1.93 2.95 6.32 9.87 12.54 21.86 6 1.90 3.14 6.12 10.32 11.45 22.14 7 2.01 2.99 6.14 11.65 12.08 21.99 8 1.85 2.77 5.99 9.87 11.45 22.00 9 1.89 2.78 6.45 10.25 10.87 22.50 10 3.0256 3.664 10.5802 13.61 18.1188 23.8224 Mean 2.01556 2.99564 6.54402 10.526 12.47388 22.23324 SD 0.361007 1.430712 1.33569125 1.33569125 2.05574779 0.58708629 Right foot Participant Shoulder velocity Hip velocity Knee velocity Ankle velocity Foot velocity Ball velocity 1 1.78 2.22 5.43 8.56 10.41 20.95 2 1.59 2.15 5.16 8.15 10.98 30.78 3 1.62 2.41 4.94 7.98 11.12 21.12 4 1.66 2.10 5.22 9.00 11.21 20.99 5 1.70 2.44 4.88 8.45 9.87 21.34 6 1.74 2.21 4.12 7.84 10.21 21.25 7 1.65 2.16 3.94 8.22 10.34 20.89 8 1.66 2.09 3.84 8.49 11.02 20.96 9 1.74 2.16 4.15 8.34 9.45 21.04 10 3.044 3.72 8.796 14.41 17.772 24.41 Mean 1.8184 2.366 5.0476 8.944 11.2382 21.373 SD 0.412305 0.465278 1.3647848 1.847848 2.245865 1.024481 Discussion When players kick the ball with the dominant limb, they are more likely to show higher speed values compared to when kicked by the non-dominant leg. This is because a higher moment is produced by the dominant limb and there is a better inter-segmental pattern and a transfer velocity from the foot to the leg using the dominant foot. Using kinetic analysis, there is non-significant differences in muscle moment exertion between the dominant and non-dominant limbs. In addition, the amount of work done by the dominant leg is more [ CITATION Kel07 \l 1033 ]. The data was analysed using SPSS software and transferred to the tables in the results section. Results were reported as mean and standard deviation. The results showed that the ROM of the markers of the dominant leg was higher than the non-dominant leg. The peak velocity of markers of the dominant leg was significantly higher. This can be attributed to lower muscle coordination and stiffness of the non-dominant leg during impact with the ball. Optoelectronic data collection is useful since it is flexible and adaptable to other kinds of sports. The analysis of the dominant foot and the non-dominant foot are comparable. The beginning of the ball of the foot striking the ground is the onset of the movement and ends when the foot is lifted off the ground. The swing phase is the total time the foot remained lifted in the air. The final phase of the cycle ended when the ball of the foot touched the ground with the next swing phase [ CITATION Cla09 \l 1033 ]. Questions 1. What do you think the summation of speed principle/ proximal to distal sequencing is? The summation of speed principle is the maximum transfer of energy in the body in an efficient manner and sequence the energy transfer in a certain order. In this process, the load such as a ball is developed from the ground and energy is transferred to the final lever. 2. Does your data support these principles? The data in the tables above support the principle of distal to proximal sequencing. The data shows that the dominant leg which is the right foot had a greater velocity compared to the non-dominant left foot. 3. How might the velocity affect their kicking technique and performance and does the ball dissipate any of the energy and velocity? The velocity of the foot has an impact on the ball speed as well as the quality of the ball. The higher the speed of the foot before impact, the shorter foot-ball contact and the highest the ball speed thereby the kicking technique is affected. As the ball travels through the air it dissipates some kinetic energy and velocity is decreased. Coaching material Football players have a little level of musculoskeletal abnormalities and professional football players. The dominant leg is more flexible compared to the non-dominant player therefore more emphasis should be placed on more balance flexibility. Coaches and players can strategize on a program that will improve the strength and balance of the football players. The strength of knee joint muscles can be affected by the results of the support of professional football training programs [ CITATION Dan13 \l 1033 ]. From the findings, it is evident that the dominant leg has a greater velocity compared to the non-dominant leg. However, it is important that players should be trained on how to use both legs equally instead of just using the dominant leg. The coaches should use instances where the players are not allowed to use their dominant legs. Some players may tend o be embarrassed of using the non-dominant leg therefore should be encouraged to use it. A player should set enough timing at the start of every practice and work on using the non-dominant leg. This allows them to be more comfortable and improve on timing of the strike. Research indicates that there should be consistence in striking a ball with either feet. The non-dominant leg should be placed alongside the ball, the head should be steady and the eyes focused on the ball. Learning on the use of the non-dominant leg is important especially when a player gets an injury and is not able to use the dominant on efficiently. The use of the non-dominant leg will provide a higher degree of security when choosing action in the football pitch. When the coaches and the players put more emphasis on training the non-dominant leg it improves the performance of both legs. It has also been established that football players are more likely to sustain the anterior cruciate ligament when using the non-dominant leg. Therefore coaches can limit the use of non-dominant leg in the pitch to avoid injuries. Coaches may also come up with programs that would prevent injuries in football. Coordination of use of both the dominant and non-dominant leg is obtained by being specific to the task and learner. After considerable practice, players can increase the range of motion at the hip and knee joints reflected by an earlier onset of extension of the knee in relation to the maximal angular velocity of the hip. Research also indicates that football players have a better standing balance in non-dominant one legged stance. Moreover, football players prefer to kick using the dominant leg since they have a better control. Maximizing kicking performance will be through appropriate training of both legs and increasing the one-leg standing balance [CITATION Bar11 \l 1033 ] When comparing the dominant legs whether left or right, dynamic balance is significantly better in left footed than right footed players. This is because the left footed players tend to use both sides of the body to a greater extent than the right footed players in daily tasks. This will result to greater function in the non-dominant side therefore greater confidence to kick with the non-dominant side. If the right footed players are trained to use their dominant limb to stabilize more often during matches and training, they will be less reliant on kicking with their dominant leg and will be able to achieve better dominant leg balance scores and will focus less on the dominant limb. This will make the players make better decisions when kicking with their non-dominant leg. The players should also recognize their dominant and non-dominant feet and should practice different types of passes while varying the intensity using the non-dominant foot/ the player should also focus on one spot consistently and work from various distances. There should be twice as much repetitions as using the dominant foot when practicing alone. The coach should design a suitable curriculum where players are encouraged to use both sides of the body in dribbling, passing, receiving and shooting of the ball. These biomechanical differences between the dominant and non-dominant leg will help the coaches train the players on how to improve their performance based on a coaching intervention. References CITATION Dav00 \l 1033 : , (Davids, Lees, & Burwitz, 2000), CITATION Car01 \l 1033 : , (Carey, Smith, Shepherd, Skriver, & Rutland, 2001), CITATION Kel07 \l 1033 : , (Kellis & Katis, 2007), CITATION Cla09 \l 1033 : , (Clagg, Warnock, & Thomas, 2009), CITATION Dan13 \l 1033 : , (Daneshjoo, Rahnama, Mokhtar, & Yusof, 2013), CITATION Bar11 \l 1033 : , (Barone, Macaluso, Traina, Leonardi, & Di Felice, 2011), Appendix Left foot Right foot Read More