Funded in part by Australian Football League and Cricket Australia under the Synthetic Turf Program
Cricket players' perceptions of playing on artificial turf
Twomey DM, Petrass LA
Journal of sports sciences · 1 citation
Review labels
Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.
How it was studied
- Design
- Cross-sectional study (classified by our AI screen)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Industry funded
- Industry group
- Australian Football League and Cricket Australia under the Synthetic Turf Program
Based on 1 listed funder(s).
Publication
- Published
- 2024-11-15 · J Sports Sci · vol. 42 · issue 22 · pp. 2153–2161
- Publisher
- Taylor & Francis
- Cited
- 1 citation · more than 58% of similar papers · 0.3× the field average
- References
- 37 works
- Access
- Paywalled
- Research areas
- Sports injuries and prevention · Sports Performance and Training · Sport Psychology and Performance
- Keywords
- Cricket, Perception, Aeronautics, Computer science, Psychology, Simulation, Engineering, Biology, Ecology
- MeSH
- humans, poaceae, athletic injuries, perception, floors and floorcoverings, adult, male, athletic performance, young adult, surveys and questionnaires, cricket sport
2 authors
From AU
- D. Twomey · correspondingFederation University
- Lauren A. PetrassFederation University
Abstract
With the recent introduction of artificial turf outfield playing surfaces in community-level cricket, this paper presents the physical performance and injury-related perceptions of male, senior cricketers. Following validity and reliability testing, 43 cricketers from two clubs completed a questionnaire comprising three sections: demographic information; individual performance; and injury risk and severity. Descriptive variables were computed, and chi-square tests were conducted to identify differences in perceptions based on the field type that players were exposed to and their injury status. Most players preferred artificial turf for training (53.7%) and wet/rainy conditions (64.1%), but natural grass for competitive games (67.4%) and dry conditions (69.0%). There were significant differences in perceptions for game speed (p p = 0.015), and the overall physical performance quality based on injury status (p = 0.017) and field (p < 0.021). Skin injuries were the only injuries that were reported as more likely on artificial turf. In general, players did not feel that the technical and physical performance aspects of cricket were affected when playing on artificial turf compared to natural grass. However, the field type that players were exposed to significantly influenced their perceptions and highlights the importance of artificial turf composition for future adoption in cricket.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.