Breadcrumbs Section. Click here to navigate to respective pages.
Chapter
Chapter
Table 2. Vertical jump developed by the 4 groups (Means values ± SD). (a) values for GK significantly higher than for DF (P<0.05). (b) values for GK significantly higher than for MF (P<0.05). (bb) values for GK significantly higher than for MF (P<0.01). (c) values for GK signifieantly higher than for FW (P<0.05). (cc) values for GK significantly higher than for FW (P<0.01). (e) values for DF significantly higher than for MF (P<0.05). (ee) values for DF significantly higher than for MF (P<0.01). (f) values for DF significantly higher than for FW (P<0.05). (ff) values for DF significantly higher than for FW (P<0.01).
DOI link for Table 2. Vertical jump developed by the 4 groups (Means values ± SD). (a) values for GK significantly higher than for DF (P<0.05). (b) values for GK significantly higher than for MF (P<0.05). (bb) values for GK significantly higher than for MF (P<0.01). (c) values for GK signifieantly higher than for FW (P<0.05). (cc) values for GK significantly higher than for FW (P<0.01). (e) values for DF significantly higher than for MF (P<0.05). (ee) values for DF significantly higher than for MF (P<0.01). (f) values for DF significantly higher than for FW (P<0.05). (ff) values for DF significantly higher than for FW (P<0.01).
Table 2. Vertical jump developed by the 4 groups (Means values ± SD). (a) values for GK significantly higher than for DF (P<0.05). (b) values for GK significantly higher than for MF (P<0.05). (bb) values for GK significantly higher than for MF (P<0.01). (c) values for GK signifieantly higher than for FW (P<0.05). (cc) values for GK significantly higher than for FW (P<0.01). (e) values for DF significantly higher than for MF (P<0.05). (ee) values for DF significantly higher than for MF (P<0.01). (f) values for DF significantly higher than for FW (P<0.05). (ff) values for DF significantly higher than for FW (P<0.01).
ABSTRACT
Results in WAMJ for GK and DF showed a correct segmental coordination and reflect match situations perfectly. On the other hand, FW players showed a weakness in a task compatible with their roles of contesting possession of the ball in the air.
