Abstract
In rugby league, tests of sport-specific skill often involve subjective assessments of performance by observers of varying qualification. However, the reliability of such subjective assessments has yet to be investigated via appropriate statistical techniques. Therefore, the aims of the current study were to investigate: (1) the intra-observer reliability of a non-qualified observer (‘novice’) and (2) the inter-observer reliability of the three observers (two qualified ‘experts’ and one novice observer) in the assessment of catching, passing and tackling (stages 1 and 2) ability in elite adolescent rugby league players (age: 14.7±0.5 years). Players performed each skill element within a simulated practice drill and were assessed in ‘real time’ by the observers according to pre-defined criteria. An overall bias (P<0.05) was revealed between the observers in stage 1 of catching and stage 1 of passing, the differences being higher for the novice compared to both expert coaches for each stage of catching and the first stage of passing, and between expert 2 and the novice for stage 2 of tackling. No comparisons met the pre-determined analytical goal of ‘perfect agreement’, for any of the skill components. Comparisons between the expert observers did not reach perfect agreement, with the lowest values occurring for both tackling skill stages (60–65%). None of the tests employed were sufficiently reliable to potentially discern between players of differing ability, which may mean up to 56% of players' skill being misinterpreted. The credibility of such assessments should be questioned and alternative tests considered.
Highlights
In rugby league, tests of sport-specific skill have been used to differentiate between higher and lower playing standards in both adult (Gabbett, Jenkins & Abernethy, 2011; Gabbett, Kelly & Pezet, 2007) and junior players (Gabbett, Jenkins & Abernethy, 2010)
Such tests have grown in popularity since the assessment of technical skills performed within an open environment may offer a more realistic playing scenario in comparison to the closed skill testing often utilised in skill test batteries (Ali, 2011)
Based upon the analytical goal of a ‘perfect agreement’, further analysis showed that the degree of variation between the expert coaches and the novice was as low as 30%, and no better than 65%
Summary
Tests of sport-specific skill have been used to differentiate between higher and lower playing standards in both adult (Gabbett, Jenkins & Abernethy, 2011; Gabbett, Kelly & Pezet, 2007) and junior players (Gabbett, Jenkins & Abernethy, 2010) Such tests are typically technique (process) rather than outcome based, involving subjective assessments relating to the quality of the performed skill, performed within simulated playing scenarios. The proficiency of players has been subsequently based upon a Likert scale rating provided by an observer (Gabbett et al, 2010; Gabbett, 2008; Gabbett, et al, 2007) Such tests have grown in popularity since the assessment of technical skills performed within an open environment may offer a more realistic playing scenario in comparison to the closed skill testing often utilised in skill test batteries (Ali, 2011)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
