One of the most sophisticated and essential sensory systems for receiving information from the environment is vision.¹ Sports vision refers to an individual’s ability to effectively and efficiently utilise the three phases of visual processing – perception, integration and response – to react to a stimulus.² This is a growing area of research in sport physiology and optometry, requiring a wide range of physical and mental skills for competitive sports.² Vision is a crucial factor in sports execution,^3,4 and high-level sports performance is achieved only when both visual information and cognitive abilities are adequate.^5,6 Sports training programmes often emphasise visual and visual-motor skills because sports are perceptually demanding, and athletes, coaches and trainers constantly seek ways to enhance these skills.⁷ Phrases such as ‘the eyes guide the body’, ‘keep your eye on the ball’, and ‘you can’t strike what you can’t see’ highlight the critical role that vision plays in athletics.^8,9 The notion that expert athletes possess superior visual-perceptual and visual-cognitive abilities is supported by empirical evidence across various sports disciplines.^8,9

Rugby necessitates visual skills that enable players to perform tasks such as target identification, scanning the opponent’s playing style, positioning, reacting to audio-visual signals, and most importantly, hand-eye and foot-eye coordination.^10,11 For instance, during a line-out, players require excellent hand-eye coordination with the ball, precise timing for throwing and catching, and the use of both central and peripheral vision to successfully complete the catch, often using opponents’ eye gazes as cues.¹¹ Research conducted by Du Toit et al.¹² on 20 female rugby players aged 19 to 24 years confirmed the positive impact of a sports vision training programme on visual skills and hand-eye coordination.

Netball is categorised as a non-static sport, requiring continuous processing of visual information for over an hour. This necessitates visual attention and dynamism from the player to consistently process game-related information.^13,14 Coaches should recognise that optimal performance in competitive sports such as netball involves the entire body, including the visual system.¹⁵ Netball performance depends on making precise decisions based on visual input,¹⁵ and the effectiveness of a player’s visual system in interpreting information determines their ability to perform quickly and accurately.¹⁶ According to Wilson and Falkel,¹⁷ hand-eye coordination, balance and visual skills (such as accommodation, visual tracking of teammates and opponents, and peripheral awareness) are among the most essential skills in netball.

Research on gender disparities in cognitive capacity is contradictory; however, it is generally acknowledged by social and psychological scientists that men and women have different spatial abilities.^18,19 Studies have shown that males exhibit stronger spatial skills on average than females in various sports categories.²⁰ However, when comparing tennis and volleyball athletes (both hand-eye coordination sports) with similar performance and training experiences, no significant differences in spatial ability were found between males and females, suggesting that sport activity may influence spatial abilities.²¹ In other high-impact sports such as basketball, female athletes have been found to outperform male athletes, with evidence suggesting that androgens might enhance spatial abilities in women while impairing them in men.²²

These findings indicate that the physical impact level and associated hormonal variations may explain the differences in capacities between male and female athletes.²² The contradictory findings on visio-spatial intelligence (VSI) between male and female athletes may be because of the use of standard testing methods rather than sport-specific test batteries. There is a knowledge gap regarding the VSI of male and female athletes because of the lack of sport-specific research. This study was conducted to compare VSI between male rugby players and female netball players using a hand-eye coordination-specific visual test battery.

The findings showed that there was a significant difference (P ≤ 0.05) between rugby players and netball players in three of the six tests (Table 1). In terms of speed of recognition (P = 0.000), peripheral awareness (P = 0.000) and hand-eye coordination (P = 0.000), rugby players significantly outperformed netball players, but not in terms of accommodation facility (P = 0.070), saccadic eye movement (P = 0.156) and visual memory (P = 0.163). The findings showed that there was a significant difference (P ≤ 0.05) between rugby players and the sedentary control group in five of the six tests (Table 2). In terms of accommodation facility (P = 0.000), saccadic eye movement (P = 0.000), speed of recognition (P = 0.000), peripheral awareness (P = 0.000) and hand-eye coordination (P = 0.000), rugby players significantly outperformed the sedentary group, but not in terms of visual memory (P = 0.809). Furthermore, the findings showed that there was a significant difference (P ≤ 0.05) between netball players and the sedentary control group in five of the six tests (Table 3). In terms of accommodation facility (P = 0.000), saccadic eye movement (P = 0.000), speed of recognition (P = 0.000), peripheral awareness (P = 0.000) and hand-eye coordination (P = 0.000), netball players significantly outperformed the sedentary group, but not in terms of visual memory (P = 0.195).

According to a rank-ordered analysis, rugby players performed 46% faster at the speed of recognition than netball players, followed by 19% for hand-eye coordination and 16% for peripheral awareness (Table 1).

Rugby players performed 77% faster at the speed of recognition than the sedentary group, according to a rank-ordered analysis, followed by 32% for saccadic eye movement, 31% for hand-eye coordination, 26% for peripheral awareness and 25% for accommodation facilities (Table 2).

Netball players performed 56% faster at the speed of recognition than the sedentary group, according to a rank-ordered analysis, followed by 28% for saccadic eye movements, 20% for accommodation facilities, 15% for hand-eye coordination and 12% for peripheral awareness (Table 3).

This study compared the VSI of male rugby players and female netball players using a battery of hand-eye coordination-specific visual tests. The six components of VSI assessed were accommodation facilities, saccadic eye movements, speed of recognition, peripheral awareness, hand-eye coordination and visual memory.

A statistical difference was found in accommodation facilities between rugby and netball players, with netball players demonstrating superior performance. This finding aligns with Agostini et al.,³¹ who also observed better accommodation facilities in female players compared to male players. However, Muzaliha et al.³² found no discernible relationship between gender and accommodation facilities. Factors contributing to these results may include the consistent engagement of women in visual tasks, which can enhance visual processing capacity, as suggested by Feng et al.³³ In addition, a positive correlation exists between prenatal testosterone and women’s visuo-spatial abilities.³⁴ Women displaying high levels of androgyny – fewer feminine traits and more masculine behaviours – may perform better in visual tasks.³⁵ Research suggests that females may have more interhemispheric brain connections, enhancing their ability to integrate visual information and perceive patterns.^36,37 Both rugby and netball players outperformed a sedentary control group in accommodation facilities, consistent with findings by Mathe et al.¹⁴ and Millard et al.²⁵ Conversely, Omar et al.³⁸ reported superior accommodation facilities in non-athletes compared to athletes, potentially because of the intense focus and rapid adaptability required in athletic training.³⁸

Rugby players also exhibited superior saccadic eye movements compared to netball players, this is controversial to the findings by Sargezeh et al.,³⁹ who observed longer scan paths and larger saccade amplitudes in females. Wilson et al.⁴⁰ reported no gender differences in saccadic eye movements. Gender-specific processing strategies could account for the differences in performance observed,^41,42 with high scores among females possibly because of effective instruction-following and extensive training.⁴³ Variations in retinal wiring, including photoreceptor and retinal ganglion cell distribution, may contribute to female superiority in this area.⁴⁴ Rugby and netball players also surpassed the sedentary control group in saccadic eye movements, echoing findings by Nakamoto and Mori⁴⁵ regarding improved saccadic movements in baseball and basketball players. However, shooters showed no differences from non-athletes in saccadic eye movements.⁴⁶ Visual training, physical conditioning, mental focus and strategic skills likely contribute to superior athletic performance.⁴⁷

Rugby players demonstrated a 46% faster speed of recognition than netball players, showing the greatest disparity. This finding supports McGivern et al.,⁴⁸ who found men outperforming women in speed recognition tasks favouring movement processing. Conversely, Camarata and Woodcock⁴⁹ observed higher scores in females for speed of recognition. Men’s faster route learning and accurate distance estimation, linked to superior visual abilities and mental rotation strategies, may explain these differences.²¹ Gender differences in small-scale spatial ability may arise from the cognitive strategies employed,⁵⁰ with women often using less effective egocentric strategies.⁵¹ Rugby and netball players both outperformed sedentary controls, consistent with Nakamoto and Mori⁴⁵ regarding speed of recognition in baseball and basketball players. Conversely, Mori et al.⁵² found no significant differences in recognition speed between karate athletes and non-athletes. Athletes’ need to quickly scan the field and process information for decision-making likely enhances their speed of recognition.⁶

Peripheral awareness also showed significant differences between rugby and netball players. This aligns with David et al.,⁵³ who found males superior in peripheral vision when assessing children’s sensitivity to traffic hazards. However, Adhilakshmi et al.⁵⁴ found no gender differences in peripheral field vision. Women may use route-imagining and reference place strategies more effectively,²¹ and hormonal effects during adolescence could influence spatial experiences and preferences, leading to gender disparities.^55,56 Experienced soccer players also showed differences in peripheral vision compared to novices,⁵⁷ although Ward et al.⁵⁸ found little difference in peripheral awareness among football players of varying experience. The enhanced peripheral awareness in athletes may stem from visual training, physical conditioning and mental focus.⁴⁷

Rugby players demonstrated superior hand-eye coordination compared to netball players, aligning with Swathi et al.,⁵⁹ who found men had an advantage in hand kinematics and tracking accuracy. However, Orhan et al.⁶⁰ found no gender differences in overall eye coordination. Evolutionary pressures may have led to sex-specific spatial abilities, giving males an edge in such tasks.⁶¹ Sex hormones, such as estrogens and androgens, along with differences in hemispheric language processing differences in women may also contribute these findings.^19,62 Both rugby and netball players showed superior hand-eye coordination compared to the control group, supporting findings by Mathe et al.¹⁴ and contrasting with results for badminton players.⁶³ Athletic training likely enhances VSI and eye-hand reaction time.⁶⁴

Finally, rugby players exhibited superior visual memory compared to netball players, which was controversial to other studies showing females have better visual memory post-concussion.⁶⁵ Other studies, however, found no gender differences in visual memory among adolescent soccer players.⁶⁶ Superior visual memory in females may result from analytical, detail-oriented approaches,⁶⁷ while males typically use holistic strategies.⁶⁸ There was no significant difference in visual memory between rugby players and the sedentary control group, consistent with findings by Tomczyk et al.⁶⁹ and Mathe et al.¹⁴ Athletes’ need to memorise and retain pertinent information likely enhances cognitive functions and motor skills, contributing to overall athletic performance.⁷⁰

The identified superiority of certain VSS within this study carries broad implications for theories of vision, test selection and the development of sport-specific VSS testing batteries. While confirming the hypothesis that athletes, particularly rugby and netball players, exhibit superior VSS compared to non-athletes, the study also revealed that this superiority does not extend to all aspects of VSS, such as visual memory. In addition, utilising a hand-eye coordination specific VSS test battery effectively differentiated between different sports, showing significant differences in three out of six VSS tests, with rugby players outperforming the netball players. However, this trend was not consistent across all VSS tests, suggesting that future research should explore the training methods employed by both sports, as these may account for the observed differences.