Qualitative analysis of the effectiveness of the rotational weight push of one of the country's champions

Abstract

Most coaches rely on simple self-observation or non-technical scientific observation in evaluating weight throwers. Their decision is based on their self-evaluation, which is somewhat flawed due to the speed of movement, its multiple stages and variables, and based on the progress achieved in the means of technical scientific observation and reliance on objective judgment (evaluation). The researcher found it necessary to use it in judging the level of technical performance. The research aims to identify the evaluation of technical performance by experts for the effectiveness of pushing the weight. And to identify some mechanical errors in performance. The researcher used the descriptive approach for its suitability and the nature of the research. The research sample consisted of one of the country’s champions in the weight-pushing activity. The researcher used devices and tools (one (1) Sony video camera, a computer, a standard tape, and a holder to fix the camera). A legal weight of (7.260 kg) was used, and content analysis of scientific sources, measurement, testing, technical scientific observation, and qualitative analysis were used as means of collecting data. The research experiment was filmed on Saturday, 3/6/2021, at exactly ten o’clock in the morning, at the throwing field in the College of Basic Education. If the camera is fixed on the basis of the transverse axis of the shooter’s body and the distance between the camera lens focus and the shooter’s shooting position is (10 m) and the height of the lens focus above the ground is (1.25) m. The performance evaluation form for the weight-pushing activity using the rotation method was designed and presented to a group of experts and specialists. The researcher concluded that rotation has the greatest impact on the achievement. The throwing phase has a significant impact on the achievement and is second only to rotation in terms of the experts’ analysis. Coverage and the readiness stance have the same evaluation in terms of importance in the experts’ evaluation.