Comparison of two computerised notational analysis systems to reliably analyse work-rate in basketball

Abstract

The main purpose of the current study was to compare the capabilities of Sportscode (version 7) and Trak Performance (version 3.1) in facilitating the time-motion analysis of women’s basketball. Player movements were analysed into five locomotor categories using Sportscode and Trak Performance. Sportscode relied on subjective categorisation supported by operational definitions compared to Trak Performance which functioned by continuous tracking reliant on speeds. Both approaches were performed manually by a single analyst who analysed video footage five times for three players. Systems were compared for reliability in addition to functional and non-functional qualities. Sportscode obtained very good (k=0.87) and good (k=0.74) strengths of agreement for intra- and inter-reliability respectively, in comparison to moderate (k=0.54 and k=0.46) strengths with Trak Performance (Altman, 1991). When motion categories were compared between the systems a very good (k=0.91) strength of agreement was attained for Stand/Walk whilst a very poor (k=-0.25) strength was obtained for Sprint. Both systems demonstrated measurement issues but Sportscode demonstrated to be more reliable due to video editing capabilities. It was concluded that user preference should differentiate between use of either system.