Applied performance analysts are increasingly seen as sports science professionals; however, there is no accepted framework for professional practice. The purpose of this study is to develop and validate a framework for professional practice in applied performance analysis (PA) which identifies the components of practice and the expertise underpinning it. A six-step framework analysis was conducted: (1) An initial conceptual framework was devised based on well-accepted components of applied practice; (2) A systematic review identified 90 papers relating to applied PA practice; (3) Papers were coded to the initial framework and additional themes recorded; (4) Themes were analysed and synthesised to construct a draft framework; (5) This draft was validated by surveying 24 experienced applied performance analysts and academic experts; (6) A revised framework is reported based on stakeholder engagement feedback. Nine components of practice were identified; establishing relationships and defining roles, needs analysis and service planning, system design, data collection and reliability checking, data management, analysis, reporting to key stakeholders, facilitation of feedback to athletes and service review and evaluation. Our evidence suggests that applied PA practice is underpinned by five areas of expertise: contextual awareness, building relationships, performance analysis and sporting expertise, technical expertise and professional behaviours.

The objective of this study was to identify performance indicators which differentiated between winning and losing elite Gaelic football teams. Eighty three technical and tactical performance variables were measured in 13 teams during 26 league and championship games throughout 2014–2015. Univariate analysis of full-games revealed that winners achieved a significantly higher total score, number of scores, shots, points, points from play and goals, resulting in superior shot efficiency, average attack per score, and scores per 10 possessions. Winners gained significantly more turnovers and completed significantly less unsuccessful hand passes. Winners also performed significantly less kick outs, resulting in fewer successful kick outs and successful dead ball kick passes overall. A principal component analysis, conducted on 18 variables produced 4 components, which explained 81.9% of the variance. Both logistic regression (8.00, χ²(1) = 16.00, p < 0.001) and discriminant analysis (Ʌ = 0.53, χ²(1) = 13.77, p < 0.001) revealed that one component, defensive counterattacking, significantly contributed to outcome and differentiated winners from losers with a cross-validation accuracy of 87.5%. Coaches can use this information to organise their defensive system to generate opposition turnovers and also incorporate sufficient flexibility to facilitate effective transitions to exploit their own offensive counterattacking opportunities.

Research into the perceptions, practices and engagement of coaches with performance analysis is fundamental to informing the continued development of the discipline and its practitioners. The aim of this study was to survey a large sample of coaches of varying profiles, regarding their use and integration of performance analysis, to explore its perceived value and barriers to its use. Survey data were analysed from 538 Irish coaches qualified at Level 1 and above (82% male), from 37 sports. A spectrum of coaches’ engagement with performance analysis, ranging from no formal performance analysis (49%), to coaches doing their own analysis (coach-as-analyst, 38%) and coaches with analyst-support (13%) was observed. The Level 2 coaching qualification was a key distinguisher between coaches using and not using performance analysis. Significant differences exist between the practices of coaches with and without analyst-support. Coaches with analyst-support are more likely to have regular access to video, spend more time analysing, regularly use performance analysis to inform training and use computerised analysis software. Barriers to the use of performance analysis varied along the spectrum of performance analysis engagement. This research can underpin future developments in coach and analyst education that will optimise the systematic use of PA across all levels of sports performance.

This study objectively analyses how Gaelic football teams counter-attack. Fifteen matches played in the All-Ireland senior football championship during the 2007 and 2008 seasons were analysed using publicly available broadcast coverage. Results indicated that the outcome of counter-attacks was significantly associated with the destination area of the counter-attack (p<0.001) with more counterattacks occurring in central areas of the pitch, in front of goal. There was a significant difference between the number of passes (p < 0.001) and the duration of the counter-attacks (p < 0.001) between counterattacks of different outcomes. Successful counterattacks relied on teams maintaining possession, allowing players to move the ball in a controlled manner, allowing players off the ball to obtain good supporting positions and exploiting the opposition whilst they are vulnerable and disorganised. Attacks lasting between 26s and 35s were found to be the most successful. Longer passing sequences during counter-attacks were found to be more successful compared to attacks with fewer passes which had a higher turnover rate. Successful counterattacks require players to have the ability to carry the ball, break the tackle and provide support for the man in possession.

The lack of sport science research conducted on female sport, makes it challenging for coaches and sport science practitioners to develop an evidence-based approach. Ladies Gaelic football (LGF) is the most popular female sport in Ireland with over 200,000 members, however there has been no research to benchmark performance. The current study investigates the game characteristics of LGF by developing analysis system which could provide benchmark profiles of successful performance at elite level and evaluate the transferability of the game intelligence available within LGF’s brother sport, Gaelic football (GF). Thirty-one games (62 performances) were analysed from the 2019 and 2020 TG4 All-Ireland Senior Ladies Football Championship using NacSport Scout+. Statistical differences between winning and losing performances were identified using paired sample t-tests (p ≤ 0.05) and Wilcoxon signed ranked tests (p ≤ 0.05). Winning teams were found to be significantly superior to losing teams, demonstrating superior ability to gain and use possession. LGF and men’s GF teams adopt different strategic approaches to the game. The current study provides a first insight into the nature of LGF with benchmark data, facilitating a better understanding of the game demands of LGF and the key points of difference between male and LGF.

Game demands of Elite Men’s Gaelic Football (GF) are understudied and far from clear. This first study to investigate the performance outcomes for winners and losers in a complete Senior Inter-county championship (SFC) will analyse which characteristics of possession were more likely to lead to score. Possessions (n = 6,174) from all games in the 2016 SFC (n = 64) were analysed using Dartfish ConnectPlus 7.0. Wilcoxon signed-rank test identified statistical differences (p < 0.05) between 20 performance indicators for winning versus losing teams, while a binary logistic regression was used to model shot outcome in terms of process indicators; method of gaining possession, area possession is gained, number of passes and duration of each possession, on the outcome of the possession. Findings reveal winning teams had significantly more possessions, higher productivity and lower turnover rates than losers. Logistic regression highlighted that opposition kickouts, possession duration and area where possession commenced were associated with possession outcome.