Physical fitness of elite women's rugby union players over a ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2.4.2 Stature There is a clear distinction in stature (standing height) between male forwards and backs at junior (Durandt et al., 2006) and professional level (Duthie et al., 2003). Interestingly, a data analysis of New Zealand Rugby Players between 1972 and 2004 shows, that forwards have become slightly shorter whereas backline players have become taller (Quarrie & Hopkins, 2007). It has been speculated that the decrease in stature of the forwards coincides with the introduction of the law permitting lineout jumpers to be supported in the lineout as this law allows good lifters to overcome slight disadvantages in the stature of the jumper. In contrast to male players, numerous studies have demonstrated that senior and school girl’s forwards and backs have similar stature (Table II) (Kirby & Reilly, 1993; Quarrie et al., 1995; Sedlock, Fitzgerald, & Knowlton, 1988). Recent literature has shown that both elite women’s rugby union forwards are significantly taller than backs (Schick et al., 2008). It would appear that players in the forwards need to be tall to contest aerial possession of the ball in line-outs. 2.4.3 Sum of Skinfolds The majority of anthropometric assessments of rugby players have involved quantifying the body fat levels (Duthie et al., 2003). The calculation of percentage body fat is problematic, due to limitations in establishing percentage body from estimates of body density and skinfold measurements (Martin, Ross, Drinkwater, & Clarys, 1985) and the measurement error of different methods and prediction equations (Duthie et al., 2006a). Given these concerns, it is 24
Table I: Body Mass (kg) of female rugby player Body Mass (kg) Mean SD Forwards Backs Gabbett (2007) Elite Rugby league 75.5 ± 12.5 64.7 ± 7.6 Schick, Molloy & Willey (2008) Elite Rugby Union 80.2 ± 10.1 68.0 ± 7.5 Quarie et al., (1995) Senior New Zealand 75.6 61.4 Kirby & Reilly (1993) Senior England 68.9 ± 6.6 60.8 ± 5.7 Williams (1984) Club United States 68.9 ± 6.1 60.7 ± 5.9 Sedlock, Fitzgerald, & Knowlton (1988) Club 69.2 ± 9.3 54.1 ± 6.8 25
Page 1 and 2: PHYSICAL FITNESS OF ELITE WOMEN'S R
Page 3 and 4: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to ack
Page 5 and 6: In both positional groups, no signi
Page 7 and 8: 2.3 PHYSIOLOGICAL DEMANDS OF RUGBY
Page 9 and 10: 4.3.3 Speed .......................
Page 11 and 12: LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table I: Body M
Page 13 and 14: CHAPTER ONE STATEMENT OF THE PROBLE
Page 15 and 16: 2007). Static exertion requires gre
Page 17 and 18: From the time men’s rugby union b
Page 19 and 20: • 10 and 40 m speed • 1 RM benc
Page 21 and 22: (Gabbett, 2007; Quarrie et al., 199
Page 23 and 24: Physical performance characteristic
Page 25 and 26: CHAPTER TWO REVIEW OF RELATED LITER
Page 27 and 28: LEOPARDS No of Women’s Clubs: 7 N
Page 29 and 30: 2.2.3 International Women’s Rugby
Page 31 and 32: 2.3.1 Movement Patterns Time-motion
Page 33 and 34: Analysis of work-to-rest periods in
Page 35: 2.4.1 Body Mass There has been a ma
Page 39 and 40: Table II: Stature (cm) of female ru
Page 41 and 42: Table III: Comparison of 10m and 40
Page 43 and 44: etween age groups (Durandt et al.,
Page 45 and 46: Durandt et al., (2006) indicate tha
Page 47 and 48: Table IV: Comparison of Vertical Ju
Page 49 and 50: to allow accurate comparison (Duthi
Page 51 and 52: 1988; Ueno, Watai, & Ishii, 1988).
Page 53 and 54: staff with regards to selection and
Page 55 and 56: male rugby players may be associate
Page 57 and 58: Union. The players were sub-divided
Page 59 and 60: Body mass Skinfolds (biceps, tricep
Page 61 and 62: held at 90 degrees to the surface o
Page 63 and 64: knees extended (straight), and bare
Page 65 and 66: controlled manner to the center of
Page 67 and 68: withdraw from the test if they are
Page 69 and 70: CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS 4.1 INTRODUCTI
Page 71 and 72: the descriptive analysis indicated
Page 73 and 74: Sum of skinfolds (mm) 200 180 160 1
Page 75 and 76: Percentage Body Fat (%) 40 35 30 25
Page 77 and 78: Within forwards, there was a small
Page 79 and 80: 10m speed (sec) 2.4 2.2 2.0 1.8 1.6
Page 81 and 82: 40m speed (sec) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 * * *
Page 83 and 84: No difference was apparent within p
Page 85 and 86: Pull ups 10 8 6 4 2 * * Forwards Ba
Page 87 and 88:
50 40 * * * Forwards Backs Push-ups
Page 89 and 90:
CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AN
Page 91 and 92:
Cup (Schick et al., 2006). Attentio
Page 93 and 94:
skinfold thickness throughout the s
Page 95 and 96:
likelihood of injury during a train
Page 97 and 98:
can be possibly attributed to a gre
Page 99 and 100:
provide a good measure of the upper
Page 101 and 102:
mid-season, which performed 12 and
Page 103 and 104:
A reasonably high aerobic fitness l
Page 105 and 106:
these two broad positional groups h
Page 107 and 108:
physical fitness, it may also be ac
Page 109 and 110:
The current study has described the
Page 111 and 112:
Baker, D. and Nance, S. (1999). The
Page 113 and 114:
Crewther, B.T., Gill, N., Weatherby
Page 115 and 116:
Ellis, L., Gastin, P., Lawrence, S.
Page 117 and 118:
Hrysomallis, C. (2010). Upper body
Page 119 and 120:
Maud, P.J. (1983). Physiological an
Page 121 and 122:
Rienzi, E., Reilly, T., and Malkin,
Page 123 and 124:
Spencer, M., Bishop, D., Dawson, B.
Page 125 and 126:
APPENDIX A PARTICIPATION INFORMATIO
Page 127 and 128:
APPENDIX B CONSENT FORM Faculty of
Page 129 and 130:
3.SPEED AND ACCELARATION 10 m (sec)
Page 131 and 132:
Forwards Backs Vertical Jump (cm) T
show all

Physical fitness of elite women's rugby union players over a ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?