Profile Of Young Female Handball Players By Playing Position

Introduction

Team handball is a complex intermittent sport game, which requires players to have well developed aerobic and anaerobic capacities [4, 6]. Several motor abilities such as sprinting, jumping, flexibility, and throwing velocity are considered as important aspects of the game that contribute to the high performance of the team [7, 15, 17]. On the other hand, in a modern handball player model, specific anthropometric characteristics play a supportive role in helping athletes perform better under the actual competitive conditions [25, 26]. More specifically, body height, body mass, palm span and palm length are important in improving athletes’ performance and are considered as basic criterion for athletes’ selection in various playing positions [25, 27]. Wider palm span and longer palm length influence specific motor abilities such as dribble, passing, catching and ball throwing and contribute to maximizing throwing velocity [26]. In modern sports, international competition has become fierce, involving ever younger ages. The evaluation of young athletes’ performance is mainly based on physical fitness and anthropometric parameters, which give a clear picture of the athletes' quality and form the criteria for their promotion to a higher level.

Team positions in team handball can be broadly classified as goalkeepers, first line players, and second line players [20, 22]. During the evolution of the game, certain positions have been classified according to the specific individual playing positions [1, 17, 23]. These positions are: back players, wing players, pivots, centre backs and goalkeepers. Time motion studies have shown that in the course of the game handball players perform different activities depending on their positions [2, 23]. During the game, wings seem to cover the longest total distance and the longest distances while sprinting [14, 23], while backs seem to execute the largest number of throws [16]. Studies examining top level players have shown that backs are by far the tallest players with the largest arm span, wings are the shortest players of the team, while pivots are the heaviest with the highest body mass index [3, 25, 27].

Comparisons of anthropometric and physical fitness characteristics of individual handball playing positions are very rare. In addition, no study has investigated whether there are any differences among playing positions at young age, when athletes start to specialize in playing positions. The aim of the present study was to determine the differences in physical fitness and specific anthropometric characteristics between the five classified playing positions and to define and evaluate which of them distinguish these positions in young female team handball. Relevant literature seems to offer little information concerning motor abilities and specific anthropometric characteristics of young handball players. In addition, studies reporting differences in the above characteristics between the specific individual positions are absent and normative data for young female players do not exist. This makes the identification of specific performance standards difficult.
Additionally, results from motor performance will allow trainers to identify players’ weaknesses and design training models for improving specific athletes’ deficiencies, but also follow up the athletes’ improvement during a gaming season. Furthermore, the data of the present study could be included in the international literature and assist in talent identification and development.

Materials and Methods

Samples

The total sample consisted of 181 female young handball players with the mean age of 14.12±1.09 yrs (range 11.67 to 15.71 yrs) and 3.41±1.67 yrs of playing experience. All players participated at the highest league matches for their age category and performed 3 training sessions per week. All players and their parents were informed about the procedures of the measurements including the risks and benefits and provided their written consent for participating according to the research policy of the University of Athens.

Anthropometrics Characteristics

The anthropometric characteristics included body height and mass, body mass index, arm span, palm length and palm opening. Body height was measured at standing position with the shoulders and heels adjacent to a wall using a height meter (220 Sega, Germany). Body mass was measured using a precision scale (Sega A model 770, Germany) to the nearest 0.5 kg. Arm span was measured from the right to the left middle finger tip with the arms extended and abducted. Palm opening was measured from the fingertip of the thumb to the fingertip of the little finger with all fingers abducted, and palm length from the mid-stylion to dactylion. All length characteristics were measured to the nearest mm. All measurements were taken by the same investigator. BMI was computed as the ratio of body mass to the squared standing stature (kg∙m-2).

Physical Fitness Characteristics

Physiological assessment included the measurement of muscle power (broad jump and ball throwing velocity), running speed, sit and reach flexibility, and maximal oxygen uptake (VO2max). For the broad jump test the players stood behind a line and jumped as far as they could – allowing countermovement of arms and legs. Ball velocity was measured using a radar gun (Sports Radar 3300, Sport Electronics Inc., USA) from a standing position. The height of the gun radar was adjusted to the height of each athlete’s throwing arm. The contra-lateral leg of the throwing hand was placed to the front steadily on the ground (penalty throw). The running speed test was evaluated by maximal 30-m sprint from a standing position. The players started sprinting as fast as they could 1m before the first pair of electronic photocells (Brower timing system, USA) and they slowed after they passed the finishing line, where the second pair of electronic photocells was placed. In order to establish lower back and hamstring flexibility, players were instructed to sit with their legs straight and perform a maximal trunk flexion, aiming to reach out as far as possible. A 90o angle was kept for ankles, while “0” value was set at the position of just reaching the toes. Aerobic capacity was expressed as estimated maximal oxygen uptake using a 20-m shuttle run test and predicted by a regression equation according to the age and the running speed at the last completed stage [13]. Except for the 20-m shuttle run test, all other tests were performed twice and the better score was selected for analysis.

Statistical Analysis

Data were collected from 67 first line players (wings = 42, pivots = 25), 88 second line players (backs = 48, centre backs = 40) and 26 goalkeepers. Differences in anthropometric characteristics, broad jump, 30-m sprint, flexibility, throwing velocity and estimated VO2max of the different playing positions were compared using a one-way analysis of variance. Comparisons of group means were performed using Scheffé’s post-hoc test. All data are reported as Means ± Standard Deviations. Statistical significance was set at p<.05. The results were analyzed using SPSS software (SPSS, version 11.5, Inc, Chicago, IL.).

Results

Descriptive statistics for anthropometric and physical fitness characteristics for all players are presented in Table 1. Significant differences were detected among individual positions for height (F=17.69, p<0.001), body mass (F=17.59, p<0.001), BMI (F=10.67, p<0.001), arm span (F =9.91, p<0.001), palm opening (F=5.31, p<0.001), palm length (F=17.69, p<0.001), broad jump (F=6.42, p<0.001), ball throwing velocity (F=4.23, p<0.001), 30-m sprint (F=12.15, p<0.001) and estimated VO2max (F=4.62, p<0.001). There were no significant differences in age (F=0.17, p=0.96), playing experience (F=0.65, p=0.63) and sit and reach flexibility (F=2.09, p=0.08).

Table 1. Anthropometric and physical fitness characteristics of female team handball players

Table 2 shows the differences in anthropometric characteristics between positions as obtained by the post-hoc test. Back players were the tallest, with the greatest arm span, palm opening and palm length. They differed significantly from centre backs in height (p<0.001), arm span (p=0.002), palm length (p=0.010) and palm opening (p=0.014). They also differed significantly from wings in height (p<0.001), body mass (p<0.001), arm span (p<0.001), palm length (p<0.001) and palm opening (p=0.004). Back players showed significantly different BMI from pivots (p<0.001) and goalkeepers (p=0.039). Centre backs were significantly shorter than pivots (p=0.049), and shorter than goalkeepers but with no significant differences. Centre backs were lighter than all other players except from wings, with significant differences from pivots (p<0.001) and goalkeepers (p=0.029) and they showed significant differences from pivots (p=0.012) in BMI. Wing players were the shortest, with the least weight, the lowest BMI and the smallest palm opening and palm length among all players. They differed significantly from pivots in height (p<0.001), body mass (p<0.001), BMI (p<0.001), arm span (p=0.015) and palm length (p=0.031), and from goalkeepers in height (p=0.003), body mass (p<0.001) and BMI (p=0.001). Pivots were shorter than back players but taller than all others, they were the heaviest of all players with the highest BMI, and they did not show any significant differences from goalkeepers.

Table 2. Anthropometric characteristics of specific individual playing positions

Table 3 shows the differences in physical fitness characteristics between positions as obtained by the post-hoc test.

Broad jump: wings showed best performance among all players with significant differences from pivots (p=0.001) and goalkeepers (p=0.026). Backs performed better than centre backs, pivots and goalkeepers with significant differences from pivots (p=0.016). Centre backs on average performed better than pivots and goalkeepers with no significant differences.

Ball throwing velocity: Back players achieved the highest values of all players while goalkeepers had the lowest scores, with significant differences only between backs and goalkeepers (p=0.005).
30-m sprint: wings were significantly faster than backs (p=0.001), centre backs (p<0.001), pivots (p<0.001) and goalkeepers (p<0.001). Backs showed a statistically non-significant superiority against centre backs, pivots and goalkeepers, while goalkeepers were the slowest of all.

Estimated VO2max: wings showed statistically significant superiority to pivots (p=0.024) and goalkeepers (p=0.011) and a value reaching borderline statistical significance in comparison to back players (p=0.055). Goalkeepers showed the worst maximal aerobic capacity of all players.

Table 3. Physical fitness characteristics of specific individual playing positions

Discussion

Scarce information exists covering these ages, thus rendering comparisons very difficult. Greek female young handball players of the present study (Table 1), in comparison with 13.4±0.5 year-old Israeli [12] and 14.2±0.4 year-old Canary-Island [30] female players were taller and heavier and showed better values in broad jump than the Israelis [12] but similar values in VO2max to Canary-Islanders and to Brazilian female players aged 18±2.1 yrs [29]. It has been suggested that pronounced longitudinal dimensions of body height, extremities, palm length and palm opening in combination with explosive power of the lower and upper limbs, running speed and aerobic capacity are very important for successful playing in handball [8, 10, 24, 27]. On average, top handball players are taller than the average population and the importance of body height is different depending on the player’s position [27]. Concerning functional and fitness properties, high level adult female players develop maximal oxygen uptake between 46-57 ml•kg^-1•min^-1, 30-m sprint between 4.4-5.5 sec, and broad jump between 165-230 cm [7, 11, 21]. Lastly, throwing velocity from a standing position for top level female handball players has been reported to vary between 57-83 km•h^-1 [7, 9, 31].

As far as we know this is the first study that analyzes and compares anthropometric and physical fitness characteristics of female young handball players of different individual playing positions. The very limited previous studies of elite adult female and male handball players have showed significant differences among playing positions for height [3, 18, 22, 25], body weight [3, 18, 25], BMI [18, 22], arm span and palm length [25]. In relation to physical fitness characteristics, significant differences among playing positions have been reported for standing broad jump and 30-m sprint [21] and throwing velocity [5].
In view of the different individual playing positions and the various tasks that should be executed, we hypothesized that there should be relative differences in anthropometric and physical fitness characteristics among playing positions. The results of the present study confirm our hypothesis.

Anthropometrics Characteristics

Back players are remarkably the tallest in the team and they present greater body segments than all other playing positions, followed by pivots and goalkeepers, however with no statistical differences. Our results are in agreement with previous studies for male and female adult players [3, 18, 23, 25]. Backs participate in the central defense field, aiming to block the opponents’ shoots, they are specialized in distant shoots and they are efficient in shooting at the goal over the defensive wall. In handball tall female athletes are required for this position, as their height has a positive influence on all longitudinal body dimensions.

Tall athletes are superior in space coverage with their limbs and they have an advantage in power production as regards the leverage of body systems. Additionally, tall backs have better visual control of the court and cooperate better with pivots and extremes [25]. Wings are the shortest players in the team, in linear defense (6:0), they play at the court boundaries and usually confront players of the same height. Very tall players are not necessary in this position [25, 27]. When in attack, they do not shoot from far and over blocks – as backs do – but from positions near the 6-m goal area line, executing either dive-, falling-, or curved jump throws [25]. Centre backs are significantly different in body height than pivots and backs. Their main mission is to organize the game. In modern handball the anthropometric characteristics of these players should be similar to those of the backs. This did not happen in the present study, as they appeared to be shorter than the specifications. This is probably due to the trainers’ decision-option to place the taller players in back positions. Our results were in accordance with previous research, reporting that centre backs were the second shorter female athletes after the wings [18]. Pivots were found to be the heaviest players with the highest BMI. These findings are in agreement with previous studies in which pivots had greater body mass in relation to body height and higher BMI from all other playing positions [18, 25]. Furthermore, in one study [18], pivots in some cases have shown individual BMI almost equal to overweight players.

The position of pivots is between the opponents' defense on the 6-m goal area line, and there they have to maintain their position balance, and resist the defense’s pressure through pushes and collisions. Greater muscle mass in combination with a low center of gravity, strong upper body and relatively great total body mass are required to succeed in game conditions [25]. Goalkeepers differ mostly from the wings and centre backs with respect to body height, mass and BMI. Top class goalkeepers should be tall enough and with substantial upper and lower extremities in order to cover a vaster area of their goalpost [25]. The suggestions as to anthropologic requirements in high performance adult male handball players have been as follows [1]: backs (208 cm height, 99 kg weight, 212 cm arm span and 26 cm palm opening), centre backs (195 cm height, 92 kg weight, 205 cm arm span and 25 cm palm opening), wings (191 cm height, 91 kg weight, 193 cm arm span and 22 cm palm opening), pivots (194 cm height, 99 kg weight, 197 cm arm span and 25 cm palm opening) and goalkeepers (195 cm height, 92 kg weight, 204 cm arm span and 25 cm palm opening). Even though there are no respective requirements defined for high performance female elite handball players, they are proportionally the same.

Physical Fitness Characteristics

The present study found that wings were significantly faster than backs, centre backs, pivots and goalkeepers (Table 3). In addition, backs showed superiority, although not significant, to centre backs, pivots and goalkeepers. These findings are in agreement with previous studies [21, 23], which have found that wings are the fastest players of elite male and female teams, followed by backs. Sprinting velocity at short distances is an important element of performance in team handball [8, 21]. Players are required to cover distances between 20-30 m at maximal speed from the phase of defense to the phase of attack, or after a ball loss, to prevent a fast break. Wings participate in such moves most commonly. Studies have shown that wings spend 18% and 4% of the total playing time running faster than 3.5 m/s and 5.2 m/s, respectively [23]. In addition, wings seem to cover significantly shorter distances running slowly, but significantly longer distances running fast and sprinting in comparison to all other players [14]. These findings suggest a greater requirement for acceleration and sprint in wing players. On the other hand, goalkeepers were the slowest players as there are no such requirements for their position.

A similar explanation could also apply to the results of broad jump. Wings perform throws in a long jump in an effort to reach to the goalpost as closely as possible, either from the position they have in the game (sides and close to 6m), or at the end of a counter-attack. These attacks are performed by other players as well, however, to a considerably lesser extent and intensity [21]. In fact, backs perform more vertical than long jumps in their effort to overcome the opponent’s defense block. Muscular power is an important characteristic for all players in team handball. However, during offence wings move in a limited space of 2-3 meters and they require a greater ability to generate great force rapidly. These findings are also in agreement with a previous study [21], which reported similar broad jump performance among playing positions, with wings showing significantly higher values than goalkeepers. An interesting finding of this study was that pivots performed worst of all positions. This is probably due to the specially developed form of strength (maximum strength vs explosive power) as maximal force is more important in pivots [28], in combination with the great body mass and BMI. In their efforts to support their high body mass during the movements, pivots will probably have a reduced performance in these tasks.

In the present study, backs showed a significantly higher velocity in throwing the ball than goalkeepers, and no significant superiority over all other positions. Unfortunately there is no relative data concerning ball velocity to which we could compare our results. Previous studies have shown that goalkeepers underperform at throwing the medicine ball compared to all other playing positions [21], while it is reported that, depending on the position, elite male players are required to throw the ball at 58-60m distance for backs and centre backs, 52 m for wings and pivots and 48 m for goalkeepers [1]. Ball throwing is considered as one of the basic actions in team handball. It constitutes an important competitive skill that contributes to the performance of the player and consequently to the performance of the team [31]. Regarding the playing positions, the greatest number of throws is executed from backcourt position [16], from a distance of 9-13 m, and therefore players at this position need high muscle power to send the ball quickly to the opponent’s goalpost.

A high aerobic uptake is required in team handball, as players have been reported to cover between 4-6.5 km per game [14, 19, 23] depending on the player’s position and the competitive level of the teams. The present study found that the wings had greater estimated VO2max than all other individual playing positions, with significant differences from pivots and goalkeepers, while the difference from backs reached p values for statistical significance. There are no data available regarding playing positions to compare our results. However, it has been reported that wings cover significantly greater total distance during the game than other players, whereas goalkeepers cover the least total distance [14, 23]. High aerobic fitness is important for wings as they are the players who perform the most picks and require high levels of aerobic capacity to aid recovery after high-intensity bouts of activity. In addition, it has been reported that players during the game should maintain the ability of the optimal output in shooting (velocity and accuracy) and throwing effectiveness, which is significantly affected by time as aiming accuracy [31] or ball velocity [5] gradually decrease.

With regard to sit and reach flexibility, there were no differences between playing positions. Flexibility is one of the basic motor abilities characterizing the goalkeeper’s performance and the findings of the present study were unexpected. It was clear that goalkeepers underperformed in relation to all motor abilities of all other playing positions. This might be due to the kind of training for the specific position, and trainers’ negligence for their performance development, or their selection of athletes who do not perform well as field players. Trainers should pay more attention to goalkeepers’ selection and training, as this position is a basic element for the team’s overall performance.

Conclusions and practical application

The present study compared the anthropometric and physical fitness characteristics of specific playing positions in young female handball players. The results demonstrate that a number of differences in anthropometric and physical fitness characteristics exist between playing positions. Backs are the tallest, with the greatest arm span, palm opening and palm length. Wings are the shortest, with the least weight, the lowest BMI and the smallest palm opening and palm length among all players. Wings showed best performance in broad jump, 30-m sprint and VO2max. Back players achieved the highest values in ball throwing speed, while goalkeepers' was the lowest. Goalkeepers underperformed in relation to all motor abilities compared to all other playing positions. Above results can prove to be useful for coaches and trainers, as they are based on tests which reflect the specific characteristics of individual playing positions. The specific playing position of goalkeepers requires special training, which will be different than for the other positions and should not be neglected by the trainers who, as shown by the results above, usually favor other positions.

More profiling studies of elite young male and female handball players are required in order to obtain normative data. These findings could be added to the international literature and assist in talent identification and development.