Training for agility in Australian football

Warren Young

Session outline

• Differences between agility and change-of-direction speed

• Nature & importance of decision-making in agility

• Training for agility in footy • Design of agility activities

Agility • Defensive – pressure & turnover• Offensive

• AFL game analysis: successful agility more likely to maintain possession

• Evasion…

1 2 3

4 5 6

7 8 9

Cognitive Physical Technical

Decision‐making speed & accuracy

Visual

scanning

Anticipation Pattern recognition

Knowledge of 

situations

Core strength

Leg muscle qualities

Straightspeed

Feet placement

Adjustment of steps to accelerate & decelerate

Body lean & posture

Strength Power Reactive strength

Agility in invasion sports

Definition of agility: “A rapid whole-body movement with change of velocity or direction in response to a stimulus”(Sheppard & Young, 2006)• “agility” not “reactive agility”• Open skill

• Activities involving deceleration & changing direction around a course defined by obstacles is “change-of-direction speed” (CODS)

• Pre-planned• Closed skill

• Does not exist in footy

AFL planned agility test5 turns > 90 °

StartLine

FinishLine

2.5m

2.5m2.5m

2.5m

2.5m

2.5m

Agility and CODS are different skills:

• Correlations between agility (with reaction) and CODS (with same movement)• r=0.70 (Farrow et al, 2005)

• r=0.321 (Sheppard et al, 2006) mean r=0.567• r=0.68 (Henry et al, 2011)

CODS Agility

• 32 % commonality• 68% differences

(Cognitive)

Thought processes:CODS: • Where do I put my feet? • When do I change direction?• Pre-planned, predictable, rehearsed

Thought process - agility:Attacking• Am I protected from a tackle?• Is there someone behind me?• Can I give off to a team mate?• Should I take him on?• Should I fake a handball or step?

Defending• Which way will he go?• Is this a genuine COD or a fake?• Should I corale or commit to a 

tackle?• What part of the body should I 

focus on?

• Studies showing higher-level players better than lower-level at agility (with reaction) but not planned COD speed:

Authors Athletes

Young, Farrow, PyneMcGregor, Handke, 2011

Australian football –elite junior

Henry, Dawson, Lay, Young, 2011

Australian football

Sheppard, Young, Doyle, Sheppard, Newton, 2006

Australian football ‐WAFL

Serpell , Ford, Young, 2009 Rugby league ‐Pro

Gabbett, Kellly, Sheppard, 2008

Rugby league

So is CODS or agility more important?

• Agility with decision-making more relevant to performance

So why do CODS training?

Attractions:1. Easy to design & organise2. Control over movement & training load

(reps, intensity)3. All players receive prescribed loadDisadvantages of COD activities:1. Movements can be un-natural…2. Perception & decision-making

completely ignored

Agility decision-making

• Higher-level players react faster & more accurately in rugby league (Serpell et al, 2010), netball (Farrow et al, 2005) and soccer (Williams & Davids, 1998).

• Higher-level players less susceptible to fakes in agility manoeuvres in footy (Henry et al, 2012) & rugby union (Jackson et al, 2006)

AFL players were 6% faster and 6% more accurate than elite juniors (Carlon et al, 2013)

The agility stimulus to react must be footy-specific• Higher-level players faster than lower-level

when reacting to video footage of “opponents” but not when reacting to generic stimulus eg. arrow (Young et al, 2011) or flashing light (Henry et al, 2011)

• Video clips include a lateral “cut” after an attacker:• 2 opponents• Marks • Picks up ball• Fakes handball• Weaves (behind)

Visual search• Higher-level players look for & extract

different cues to anticipate opponents actions (Savelsbergh et al, 2005)

Strength & power training may be over-rated• Some evidence for strength, power and plyometric

training to enhance CODS. No evidence for agility

• 2013 study. Correlation between reactive strength, CODS and agility:

Change ‐of‐direction speed Agility

Reactive strength ‐0.645 (large) ‐0.101 (small)

Fast & accurate decision-making may dominate speed & power eg. Robert Harvey, Sam Mitchell

Conclusions & training applications• Training should focus on agility, not change-

of-direction speed• Stimulus to react should be game-like

• Avoid whistle, pointing, calling out, lights

Training• Can practice technique without using cones/poles• 1 v 1

• Agility belt • Get around opponent

• Encourage evasive skill eg. split-step

• 2 (attackers v 1 defender)

Small-sided games

• Advantages • Simulates agility game-demands

• specific movements & variety• footwork• decision-making• Complexity

• Can simultaneously train other fitness components, skills and tactics (time-efficiency)

Comparison of SSG (Davies et al, 2013)

30x20m5v5

All games 3 x 45 s

Game1. Game 2. Game 3. Game 4.

45x30m5v5

(more space)

20x23.2m3v3

30x20m(tag only)5v5

Game 1 Game 2 Game 3 Game 4

Agility events per player(mean)

8.8 7.2 11.3 7.8 (more handballs, decision‐making)

2D player load 10.7 8.8 13.9 11.2

Agility (Min‐Max) 2‐15 5‐10 4‐21 4‐12

Evidence for SSG training (Young & Rogers, J Sports Sciences)

• TAC Cup footballers• 11x15 min sessions

over 7 weeks in-season• Two groups:

• CODS training• SSG (handball only)

• Restrict # handballs to 4• Score by attempting evasion• Each 30-45s bout, same team maintained possession

(equal attacking and defending)• Tests:

• Planned AFL agility test (change-of-direction speed)• Video-based agility test (agility)

Results (% changes from training) Change‐of‐direction group

Small‐sided games group

Planed AFL agility test < 1% < 1%

Video‐based agility test (reactive)

0% 4% improvement(significantly better than COD group)

Reaction/decision time in agility test

4% improvement 31% improvement(significantly better than COD group)

• Mean number of changes of direction in SSG = 25/session

• Powerful training stimulus

Coaching agility in SSG• Decision-making speed developed

“implicitly” (Young & Rogers, In press; Serpell et al , 2011)• Don’t need to provide rules about where to look eg. hips

• May not be effective (Farrow et al, 2002)• Useful cues??

How do many indigenous playerslearn?

Can change-of-direction drills teachthis footwork & creativity?

• Design an agility activity or SSG • For SSG, consider:

• Amount of agility activity in time available• Engagement from all participating players• Number of players in teams• Equal or unequal team numbers• Match-ups in teams• Rules eg. tackling, scoring, disposal• Field dimensions• Duration of bouts and work/rest ratio• Other goals besides agility (fitness, skills,

tactics)