Analogies and similarities among three different technical moves with the ball: towards multi-laterality

Abstract

Aim: The work talks about an impulsive tool “the ball” and how this is controlled in rhythmic gymnastics, basketball and volleyball, to allow, through one or more pulses, the performance of specific motor tasks 1.
 We will try to highlight any similarity portion of motor actions, apparently far from each other, based on the experience of the Authors and their wealth of knowledge and skills acquired over the years in the field of technique and physic training.
 Method: Through the study of the technical implementation of three gestures: the launch in rhythmic gymnastics, the dribble in basketball and the touch of the ball in volleyball, were compared differences and similarities.
 So, we have highlighted some elements relating to: the type of trajectory produced by pulses applied to their goal; the timing and point of contact with the tool; to the particularities of management and control of the ball; the positions and movements of the different body segments involved in the action.
 Results: From the analysis and the comparisons of the factors taken into consideration, you can see how the three gestures may connect one or both upper limbs with the tool in the management of the same. In terms of similarity was noted that basketball and volleyball have an affinity with regard to: the contact of the palm with the ball and his order to control 5,6,7,8,9; the movement of the shoulder joint 3; the goal of the act; the attitude of the hand at the beginning 3,4 and at the end of the thrust 3; mutual attitude of the fingers and their position on the ball 2,3,4,6,7.
 Rhythmic gymnastics and basketball show similarities to the length of time of contact with the tool; rhythmic gymnastics and volleyball for the position of the hand 2 on the ball and the direction of the trajectory produced.
 Finally it should be emphasized that, for all three gestures, no particular similarities were highlighted: in the movement of the forearm on the arm 3,4,5,11; in the position of the upper limb 4,5,6,7; in the push of the lower limbs 3,4,10.
 Conclusion: Despite the limitations that characterize the work, for example the analysis of gestures at first sight very dissimilar, it can be said that the study could represent the stimulus to reflect further study of issues regarding the multilateral preparation in youth sports.
 References
 1. Scotton C (2007) Le specialità, gli attrezzi e la tecnica nello sport. Educazione fisica e sport nella scuola, 207/208:36-40
 2. Schnabel G (1998) Il fattore tecnico coordinativo. SdS-Scuola dello sport 13:23-27
 3. Calligaris A, Mondoni M (1993) Analisi funzionale e biomeccanica della pallacanestro. Roma, Società Stampa Sportiva
 4. Mondoni M (2002) Basket e biomeccanica. Milano, Libreria dello sport
 5. Pittera C et al. (2010) Pallavolo dentro il movimento 2 - Pallavolo dagli 11 ai 14 anni. Cormons (GO), Poligrafiche San Marco
 6. Crum D (1981) Il palleggio. Coach, III, 2: 11-12
 7. Wooden JR (1981) Il basket. Bologna, Zanichelli
 8. Di Lorenzo R, Saibene G (1998) Insegnare il basket. Roma, FIP
 9. Peterson D, (1979) Basket essenziale. Milano, Editoriale Giganti del basket
 10. Paolini M (1998) La pallavolo dai giovani ai campioni. Ancona, Humana Editrice srl
 11. Sensini N, Eid L (1999) Ritmo e movimento, Milano, Carabà edizioni