External and internal training load comparison between sided-game drills in professional soccer.

Marco Beato, Kevin L de Keijzer, Andrew J Costin
Author Information
  1. Marco Beato: School of Health and Sports Sciences, University of Suffolk, Ipswich, United Kingdom.
  2. Kevin L de Keijzer: School of Health and Sports Sciences, University of Suffolk, Ipswich, United Kingdom.
  3. Andrew J Costin: School of Health and Sports Sciences, University of Suffolk, Ipswich, United Kingdom.

Abstract

This study aims to quantify and compare the external and internal training load demands of sided-game drills in professional team players during the competitive season. Twenty-four male professional soccer players of the same club were enrolled in this study. Drills were categorized as large-sided games (LSG): 10vs10 (84 × 60 m or 72 × 60 m), Hexagon possession 9vs9 + 3 (36 × 48 m), Possession gate 8vs8 + 2 (36 × 44 m), Possession 7vs7 + 3 (30 × 32 m) or as Small-sided games (SSG): 6vs6 (48 × 42 m), and Possession 6vs4 (30 × 60 m). A total of 7 drills and 279 individual data points were included in this analysis. Distance covered, high-speed running (HSR), and sprinting distance were all calculated in meters per minute (m.min) while total accelerations (>3 m.s) and total decelerations (- < 3 m.s) were calculated in number of actions per minute (n.min). All external load was measured with global navigation satellite systems (GNSS) STATSports Apex units. Players' internal load was quantified using their rating of perceived exertion (RPE). We found that distance covered ( < 0.01, ), HSR ( < 0.01, ), and sprinting distance ( < 0.01, ) changed between drills (e.g., greater in LSG formats), acceleration ( < 0.01, ) and deceleration ( < 0.01, ) demands were greater in smaller formats (e.g., SSG 6vs6, and Possession 6vs4), while RPE was lower in the Possession gate 8vs8 + 2 format ( < 0.01, ). This study found that sided-games can replicate and sometimes exceed some match-specific intensity parameters, however, HSR and sprinting were consistently lower compared to official matches.

Keywords

References

  1. Br J Sports Med. 2016 Dec;50(24):1536-1540 [PMID: 27288515]
  2. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2019 Feb 1;14(2):270-273 [PMID: 30614348]
  3. Hum Mov Sci. 2013 Aug;32(4):808-21 [PMID: 23978417]
  4. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2004 Jun;36(6):1042-7 [PMID: 15179175]
  5. J Strength Cond Res. 2013 Apr;27(4):938-43 [PMID: 22692111]
  6. Biol Sport. 2019 Dec;36(4):317-321 [PMID: 31938002]
  7. Front Physiol. 2019 Jun 26;10:780 [PMID: 31293447]
  8. Front Sports Act Living. 2023 Feb 13;5:1116293 [PMID: 36860737]
  9. Sci Med Footb. 2022 Dec 1;6(5):549-558 [PMID: 36540910]
  10. Sports Med. 2009;39(8):615-42 [PMID: 19769413]
  11. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2014 Nov;9(6):1033-9 [PMID: 24700201]
  12. Sci Med Footb. 2022 Jun 26;:1-16 [PMID: 35700979]
  13. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2016 Nov;11(8):1038-1046 [PMID: 26915393]
  14. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2019 Oct 28;15(2):292-294 [PMID: 31172830]
  15. Sports Med. 2017 Nov;47(11):2135-2142 [PMID: 28283992]
  16. J Strength Cond Res. 2022 Jan 1;36(1):273-276 [PMID: 31800476]
  17. Hum Mov Sci. 2016 Aug;48:1-6 [PMID: 27082027]
  18. Front Sports Act Living. 2022 Sep 08;4:981836 [PMID: 36157898]
  19. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2014 May;9(3):442-5 [PMID: 23916989]
  20. J Strength Cond Res. 2018 Oct;32(10):2831-2837 [PMID: 30052603]
  21. Sports (Basel). 2021 May 26;9(6): [PMID: 34073473]
  22. Br J Sports Med. 2002 Jun;36(3):218-21 [PMID: 12055120]
  23. Sports Med. 2023 Feb;53(2):371-413 [PMID: 36331702]
  24. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2009 Jan;41(1):3-13 [PMID: 19092709]
  25. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2021 Jan 28;16(5):612-621 [PMID: 33508782]
  26. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2013 Jan;113(1):147-55 [PMID: 22615009]
  27. PLoS One. 2020 Sep 23;15(9):e0229194 [PMID: 32966305]
  28. Int J Sports Med. 2021 Apr;42(4):295-299 [PMID: 33291180]
  29. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2016 Oct;116(10):1911-9 [PMID: 27473448]
  30. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2015 Sep;115(9):1985-94 [PMID: 25963378]
  31. Front Physiol. 2021 Jul 02;12:706451 [PMID: 34276425]
  32. Front Physiol. 2018 Sep 21;9:1288 [PMID: 30298015]
  33. J Strength Cond Res. 2018 Apr;32(4):1114-1122 [PMID: 28699924]
  34. Biol Sport. 2022 Jan;39(1):145-155 [PMID: 35173373]
  35. Res Sports Med. 2021 Jan-Feb;29(1):67-76 [PMID: 32200649]
  36. Int J Sports Med. 2020 Sep;41(10):677-681 [PMID: 32455455]
  37. Sports Med. 2011 Mar 1;41(3):199-220 [PMID: 21395363]
  38. Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2015 Nov;10(8):958-64 [PMID: 25710257]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0< 001PossessionloaddrillsstudyinternalprofessionaltotalHSRsprintingdistanceexternaltrainingdemandssided-gameteamplayerssoccergamesLSG:gate8vs8 + 2SSG6vs66vs4coveredcalculatedperminuteminsRPEfoundeggreaterformatsloweraimsquantifycomparecompetitiveseasonTwenty-fourmaleclubenrolledDrillscategorizedlarge-sided10vs1084 × 60 m72 × 60 mHexagonpossession9vs9 + 336 × 48 m36 × 44 m7vs7 + 330 × 32 mSmall-sided48 × 42 m30 × 60 m7279individualdatapointsincludedanalysisDistancehigh-speedrunningmetersmaccelerations>3 mdecelerations- < 3 mnumberactionsnmeasuredglobalnavigationsatellitesystemsGNSSSTATSportsApexunitsPlayers'quantifiedusingratingperceivedexertionchangedaccelerationdecelerationsmallerformatsided-gamescanreplicatesometimesexceedmatch-specificintensityparametershoweverconsistentlycomparedofficialmatchesExternalcomparisonGPSfootballmonitoringperformancesports

Similar Articles

Cited By