Seediscussions,stats,andauthorprofilesforthispublicationat:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309232669

MAXIMALSPRINTINGSPEEDOFELITESOCCERPLAYERSDURINGTRAININGANDMATCHES

ArticleinTheJournalofStrengthandConditioningResearch·September2016

DOI:10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

CITATIONS

0

READS

264

4authors:

Someoftheauthorsofthispublicationarealsoworkingontheserelatedprojects:

ChangeofdirectionabilityinyoungsoccerplayersViewproject

LéoDjaoui

ClaudeBernardUniversityLyon1

3PUBLICATIONS4CITATIONS

SEEPROFILE

KarimChamari

Aspetar-QatarOrthopaedicandSportsMedi…

348PUBLICATIONS6,469CITATIONS

SEEPROFILE

AdamLOwen

ClaudeBernardUniversityLyon1

33PUBLICATIONS396CITATIONS

SEEPROFILE

DellalA

FIFAcentreofexcellence,Santyclinic,Lyon,…

72PUBLICATIONS1,556CITATIONS

SEEPROFILE

AllcontentfollowingthispagewasuploadedbyLéoDjaouion21November2016.

Theuserhasrequestedenhancementofthedownloadedfile.Allin-textreferencesunderlinedinbluearelinkedtopublicationsonResearchGate,lettingyouaccessandreadthemimmediately.

J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Sep 23. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

1

ORIGINAL RESEARCH 1 2 TITLE: MAXIMAL SPRINTING SPEED OF ELITE SOCCER PLAYERS DURING 3 TRAINING AND MATCHES 4 5 Running Head: Maximal speed in elite soccer 6 7 Authors: Léo DJAOUI 1*, Karim CHAMARI 2, Adam OWEN 1, and Alexandre DELLAL 1, 3 8 9 Affiliations: 10 * Corresponding author 11 1 LIBM (Inter-university Laboratory of human Movement Biology), University of Lyon, 12 University Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Villeurbanne, France 13 2 Athlete and Health Performance Research Center, Aspetar, Doha, Qatar 14 3 FIFA Medical Center of Excellence, Centre Orthopedique Santy, Lyon, France 15 16 * Corresponding author: Leo Djaoui, Lab of Human Movement Biology (LIBM), UFR STAPS - University 17 Claude Bernard Lyon 1, 27, 29 Boulevard du 11 Novembre 1918, 69622 Villeurbanne Cedex, France. Phone: 18 +33472432746, e-mail: leo.djaoui@gmail.com 19

J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Sep 23. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

2

1 ABSTRACT 2 The aim of the present study was to compare 1) the maximal sprinting speed (MSS) 3 attained by soccer players during matches (MSSmatch) according to their level of play 4 (professional 1st French division vs. elite amateur 4th French division) and the playing 5 positions; and 2) the MSS attained by professional soccer players during 14 different types of 6 small-sided games (SSG, MSSSSG) and match-play. All players monitored through the study 7 performed a 40-m sprint test to assess individual MSS (MSStest) and compare it to the 8 training and match activity, with the calculation of the percentage of MSStest (%MSStest) 9 reached. No differences were found according to the level of play, however positionally, 10 wide players achieved a higher MSSmatch, %MSStest, and MSSSSG compared to central players 11 (both defenders and midfielders) during matches and SSG. MSSmatch were higher than all 12 MSSSSG, and MSSSSG were positively correlated with the area of the pitch (0.45, p<0.001), its 13 length (0.53, p<0.001) and the number of players involved (0.38, p<0.001). The closer SSG 14 was to match situation in term of rules, the higher the MSSSSG. Wide players reached higher 15 MSS in match and SSG than central players, confirming the relevance of using SSG close to 16 match situation to specifically prepare elite players to the maximal running speed demand of 17 the match. 18 19 Keywords: SSG, physical activity, playing position, match analysis, training analysis, 20 football 21

J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Sep 23. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

3

INTRODUCTION 1 The physical qualities power and speed are essential in order to perform in elite soccer 2

match play (5,23,29). Furthermore, it has been observed that soccer players reach peak 3 running speeds close to 32 km.h-1 during match play (34,35). This quality of sprinting speed 4 depends on several factors including the level of practice and the age (3,24). Indeed it has 5 been shown that elite players would be faster on the first 10m of a 30m-sprint test than 6 amateurs (15) and that older players would be faster covering a 40m-sprint test in highly 7 trained young soccer players (10). The quality of sprinting speed also differs according to 8 players’ position as they all have specific tactical tasks and so physical needs in match. 9 However differences were observed in the current literature. Thus, Ferro et al. (24), using a 10 laser sensor system, observed in competitive student players that forwards (FW) (∼33.3 km.h-11 1) had the highest maximal sprinting speed (MSS), followed by central midfielders (CM) 12 (∼32.1 km.h-1), then by central defenders (CD) (∼31.9 km.h-1), and that wide midfielders 13 (WM) were the slowest (∼31.4 km.h-1). Al Haddad et al. (3), using the fastest 10-m split time 14 during a maximal 40-m sprint test to calculate the MSS, observed in youth elite players that 15 WM, CD and FW had a higher MSS (∼28.7 km.h-1) than wide defenders (WD) and CM 16 (∼27.7 km.h-1). Furthermore, with the same method used by Al Haddad et al. (3), Mendez-17 Villanueva et al. (31) observed in elite youth players that the fastest CD reached 35.0 km.h-1 18 and the fastest WM 34.3 km.h-1, and that the slowest CD and WM, 31.2 and 30.2 km.h-1 19 respectively. 20

However, the MSS is not the only factor influencing the speed running intensity during 21 the match. Indeed, although it was observed that faster players reach higher running speeds 22 during a match, it was also observed that some players compensated their lower MSS by 23 increasing the percentage of MSS (%MSS) reached during the match (3,31). Mendez-24 Villanueva et al. (31) observed that the fastest CD of the young elite team reached 84.4% of 25 MSS during a match and that the fastest WM reached 90.5% of MSS (slower during the test 26 than the aforementioned). Al Haddad et al. (3) observed that CM reached only ∼85.3% of 27 MSS while CD reached ∼89.1%, WD ∼90.1%, WM ∼92.2% and FW ∼88.0% and ∼93.6%. 28 These results confirmed that the very high intensity activity during matches was clearly 29 different among playing positions (3,18,21). The authors of the present study suggested that 30 speeds should always be based on relative speed rather than the speed bands set by motion 31 capture and global positional system (GPS). 32

33 Small-sided games (SSG) training have been shown to be extremely relevant to make 34 soccer players enhance their tactical and technical skills (27), to expose them to high level of 35 heart rate (HR) (higher than 90% HRmax) (4,9), to solicit high intensity running distances 36 (20,33) and to procure players high level of enjoyment (4). It was also shown that the more 37 players involved in the SSG, the higher speed intensities reached (13,26,35) probably in 38 connection with the larger space of practice and the opportunity for players to be more 39 involved in actions without the ball, as running over the opponents to create scoring 40 situations. Recently, Owen et al. (33) observed MSS reached during small-SG (4 vs. 4), 41 medium-SG (5 vs. 5 to 8 vs. 8) and large-SG (9 vs. 9 to 11 vs. 11) up to 21.6 (±1.3), 22.5 42 (±0.9) and 24.6 (±0.9) km.h-1 respectively. 43

These results combined with observations from matches show how much training and 44 matches could differ regarding to the MSS demand and performance. To our knowledge, 45 there is no study examining MSS and %MSS over elite adult soccer players during both SSG 46 and matches. Thus, the first aim of the present study was to analyse the MSS and the %MSS 47 of soccer players reached during matches, and to analyse these markers according to the level 48 of practice (professional vs. elite amateur) and the playing positions. Then, the second aim of 49

J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Sep 23. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

4

the study was to compare the maximal speed reached during different types of SSG and 1 match play according to the playing positions, the score-rules, the number of players 2 involved and the pitch sizes. Examining these markers may assist in helping coaches and 3 staff to prepare, periodize, predict, analyse and monitor players’ physical performance during 4 training and competition. 5 6 MATERIALS & METHODS 7 Experimental approach to the problem 8

In the first part of the study, professional and elite amateur players were classified 9 into five playing positions and were tested for their individual MSS with a GPS. They were 10 then tested during six different matches with the same GPS device in order to analyse their 11 MSS obtained during the match and their individual %MSS reached, and to compare the 12 results between: the groups (professional vs. elite amateur) and the playing positions. 13

14 In the second part of the study, professional players were classified into five playing 15

positions and tested with GPS during 14 different types of SSG, with different rules 16 according to the number of players involved, the way of scoring and the pitch sizes. They 17 were also tested during a match in order to compare the MSS obtained during the match to 18 the MSS obtained during the different types of SSG. 19 20 Subjects 21

To analyse differences depending on the competitive level, one group of 24 22 professional players (age: 24.3±2.6 years; height: 180.1±4.1cm; body mass: 75.0±5.3kg; % 23 body fat mass: 9.4±2.2%) competing in the French first league, was compared to a group of 24 24 elite-amateur players (age: 20.9±2.9 (28-16.8) years; height: 177.2±3.7 cm; body mass: 25 72.8±4.4 kg; % body fat mass: 9.7±3.7 %) competing in the French fourth division. Players 26 were divided into five playing positions: CD (n=10), WD (n=7), CM (n=16), WM (n=6) and 27 FW (n=8). 28

Then, another group of 14 professional players (age: 23.1±4.0 years; height: 29 178.4±5.7 cm; body mass: 73.7±5.1kg; % body fat mass: 8.8±2.2 %), from the same 30 professional team competing in the French first league, was tested over 14 SSG situations. In 31 both analyses, players were divided into five playing positions: CD (n=3), WD (n=4), CM 32 (n=4), WM (n=2) and FW (n=1). 33

The study was explained to all players and they all gave their written consent. Players 34 aged under 18 also gave a written parental or guardian consent. The study was approved by 35 the local university ethics committee and was conducted according to the principles of the 36 declaration of Helsinki. 37 38 Procedures 39 Tests. Individual maximal sprinting speed was recorded with a GPS and this value was 40 obtained from a straight sprinting 40 meters test. During the test, players used the same type 41 of GPS than during matches. Players started from a static position behind the line of the 40-m 42 sprint distance and were asked to run as fast as possible. They started when ready and 43 completed three trials with best speed performance selected in the analysis as the individual 44 maximal sprinting speed (MSStest). If during match and sided-games, a player reached a 45 higher speed than during the test, the higher speed obtained was considered as the MSStest. 46 47 Professional vs. elite amateur. The two groups participated in six soccer matches: official 48 pre-season friendly matches for professional players and official competitive matches for 49 elite amateurs. All players participating (kept for analysis) in the study played at least 45 50

J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Sep 23. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

5

minutes of the matches. During matches, they were wearing a GPS with a sampling 1 frequency of 15 Hz (GPSports SPI Elite, Canberra, Australia) in order to evaluate the 2 maximal sprinting speed (MSSmatch) they reached. The system uses signals from at least three 3 earth-orbiting satellites to determine the position and calculate movement speeds and 4 distances. The same units were used for each player in order to exclude the effects of inter-5 unit variability. Units were placed in a harness on the player’s upper back. The use of GPS 6 for assessing high speed running has been reported with a good reliability (6,16). Therefore, 7 Buchheit et al. (11) have well shown that the GPS used in the present study allow providing 8 accurate data of different running speed categories but not regarding acceleration and 9 deceleration. This value was then expressed relatively to the MSStest as a percentage of 10 maximal speed reached in match (%MSS) (8). 11 12 Small-sided games (SSG). The third group of players participated in one whole match of 90 13 minutes and 14 different sessions of SSG using the same GPS described below in order to 14 evaluate the MSSSSG they reached every time. Rules and pitch sizes of SGG were detailed in 15 table 1. 16 17

$$$ Table 1 near here $$$ 18 19 Statistical analyses. Data were presented as mean ± SD. All variables were tested with the 20 Shapiro-Wilk normality test. First, a two-way ANOVA was assessed in order to test the 21 interaction effect of groups (professional vs. elite amateur) and playing positions on MSStest, 22 MSSmatch and %MSS. When the interaction was significant, t-test was assessed in order to 23 precise the difference between the same playing positions of different groups. If the 24 interaction between groups and playing positions was not significant, we observed the single 25 effects of each factor and a Tukey post-hoc test was assessed when significant. Pearson’s 26 correlation “r” tests were assessed between MSStest, MSSmatch and %MSS. Correlations with 27 values of 0-.19, .20-.39, .40-.59, .60-79 and .80-1.00 were respectively interpreted as very 28 weak, weak, moderate, strong and very strong (22). Secondly, a non-parametric Freidman 29 test in repeated measures was assessed to compare differences between match and SSGs rules 30 whether games were played with goalkeepers, mini-goals or in ball-conservation mode. A 31 Wilcoxon post-hoc test was then assessed to precise the differences two by two. Bonferonni’s 32 correction was applied and p was consider to be significant when <0.0005 for these 104 33 (MSSmatch & MSSSSG) and 91 (%MSSmacth) comparisons two by two. Pearson’s correlation 34 “r” tests were assessed between MSSSSG and: the pitch area per player, the number of players 35 involved, and the depth of the pitches. The effect size (ES) was calculated according to 36 Cohen’s d ES for identified statistical differences were determined. ES with values of 0.2, 0.5 37 and 0.8 were respectively considered to represent small, medium and large differences (14). 38 39 RESULTS 40 Professional vs. elite amateur 41 All three variable’s distributions were found to be normal (p<0.05). A moderate 42 correlation was found between MSStest and MSSmatch (r=0.52, p<0.05), a very strong 43 correlation was found between MSSmatch and %MSS (r=0.87, p<0.05) and no correlation was 44 found between MSStest and %MSS. No differences were found between professional and 45 amateur players in the three markers observed. Differences among playing positions were 46 observed in MSStest and MSSmatch but not in %MSS. All players combined reached a mean of 47 92.45 (±7.49) % of MSS during matches (table 2). 48 49

$$$ Table 2 near here $$$ 50

J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Sep 23. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

6

1 Match vs. SSG 2

All situations combined, differences were observed amongst the playing positions 3 with a small ES (0.28). WD (25.18±3.32 km.h-1) and WM (24.48±3.03 km.h-1) were faster 4 than CM (23.18±2.53 km.h-1; p<0.001) and WD was also faster than CD (23.33±3.81 km.h-1; 5 p<0.001). 6

Significant differences on MSSSSG were found between the different types of SSG 7 with a moderate ES (0.51). Indeed, the ball-conservation rule made players run slower 8 (22.11±2.32 km.h-1) than SSG with goalkeeper (GK) (24.04±3.03 km.h-1; p<0.001) and SSG 9 with mini-goals (24.15±3.60 km.h-1; p<0.001). No differences between GK and mini-goals 10 rules were found. Moderate correlations were found between the pitch area and MSSSSG 11 (r=0.45; p<0.001), and between the length of the pitch and MSSSSG (r=0.53; p<0.001). A 12 weak correlation was also found between the number of players and MSSSSG (r=0.38; 13 p<0.001) (table 3). 14 All players combined reached a mean of 82.67 ± 10.74 % of MSS during SSG (table 4). 15

16 $$$ Table 3 and Table 4 near here $$$ 17

18 DISCUSSION 19

The aim of this study was to examine how maximal sprinting speed (MSS) was 20 affected according to the training, match play and test situation, with a special comparison 21 between professional vs. elite amateurs and match-play values vs. SSG. The main findings 22 were that 1) MSS didn’t vary according to the playing level (professional vs. elite amateur 23 players); whereas 2) MSS values differed across SSG, match play and results in 40-m sprint 24 test with difference according to the playing position. Specifically, professional players 25 reached a mean of 92.45±7.49% of MSS during matches, whereas they reached a mean of 26 82.67±10.74% of MSS during SSG. 27 28 Professional vs. elite amateur 29 The first aim of the present study was to analyse MSS reached during elite soccer 30 matches and to compare the results according to the players’ level (professional vs. elite 31 amateur) and their playing positions. A significant interaction was found between the level of 32 players and their playing positions (p<0.05) on the MSStest but the results showed no 33 significant differences between the same playing positions in the different groups (WD pro 34 vs. WD amateur; CD pro vs. CD amateur, etc.). Furthermore, no differences between groups 35 were found significant in the MSSmatch and %MSS observations. It is possible that, as 36 professional players played pre-season friendly matches, the peak running speed they 37 achieved could have been impacted by this moment of the season. However, the results 38 indicated that, in terms of individual speed qualities and in term of speed needs during a 39 soccer match, there were no differences between professional players and elite amateur 40 players. Furthermore, although these players competed in four divisions apart, the elite 41 amateur group was also composed of elite amateur young soccer players, who trained every 42 day. Thus, both groups were considered as “high-level” soccer players. Consequently, results 43 could have been different if comparing professional players to elite amateur players who 44 trained significantly less with lower abilities. It was well known that differences among 45 professional and elite amateur matches are related to the ability to repeat sprints, the total 46 distance sprinting, the physiological responses to high intensity actions and the technical 47 skills (19,36), however the present analyses completed the literature findings in showing that 48 differences among professional and elite amateur matches did not reside in differences in the 49 top speed qualities like MSS or the %MSS reached. 50

J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Sep 23. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

7

1 In this context, it appears that professional (first league) and elite amateur soccer 2

players reached and presented the same MSS during match play, however, differences were 3 found between playing positions. Indeed, when groups were pooled together, the results 4 showed that FW (31.93±1.37 km.h-1; p<0.005), WM (31.81±1.37 km.h-1; p<0.05) and WD 5 (31.67±1.37 km.h-1; p<0.05) reached higher MSStest than CD (30.55±0.99 km.h-1). The 6 present results were not in accordance with those from Ferro et al. (24) who found no 7 significant differences between FW, WM, WD and CD in a 30-meters MSStest. The 8 difference in the competition level of players tested could explain the difference between the 9 two studies. Indeed, they observed competitive students when we observed high-level 10 players. It is possible that the central players (CD an CM) of the present study were more 11 able to anticipate ball trajectories, opponents moves and thus to position correctly on the 12 pitch during matches. Moreover, their specific central position did not impose them to go as 13 fast as wide positions players or forward who used their speed to create goal situations in the 14 deep spaces of the pitch. So, it is possible that for the elite soccer players tested in this 15 particular context, MSStest of CD and CM would not be as high as MSStest of WD, WM and 16 FW because they would not need to reach a high MSS during match situations and thus, in 17 long term, they would not need to develop as high MSS as the other playing positions. The 18 observations of MSSmatch confirmed the different speed (related to tactical) needs among 19 playing positions during the match. Indeed, FW (29.98±1.92 km.h-1) and WD (30.02±2.18 20 km.h-1) were faster than CM (28.13±2.45 km.h-1; p<0.05). These observations were in 21 accordance with those from Bradley et al. (7) and from Andrzejewski et al. (1) who found 22 that FW, WM and WD were faster than CD during matches, not mattering if they were 23 international players or elite domestic players. The present results were also different with 24 those from Kaplan et al. (28) who found no differences between playing positions according 25 to a shuttle run test (10 x 5 meters. Differences between the two studies could be explained 26 by the fact that they observed repeated-sprint ability on a short distance (5 meters) whereas 27 we observed the unique and best MSS reached in a higher running distance (40 meters) and 28 the speed reached in a 5 meters could not be as high as the speed reached in a 40 meters (25). 29 However, because elite soccer is a very complex sport, it remains important to keep in mind 30 that the physical activity of the players on the pitch is affected by many parameters (e.g. 31 technical, tactical, environmental, etc.) that could prevaricate the analyses. 32

33 Moreover, no significant differences between playing positions were found when 34 analysing the %MSS reached during matches. Such results could be explained by the large 35 inter-individual variations, represented here by the mean of all mixed players 36 (92.45%±7.45%) and the large SD observed (from 4.85% to 11.33%). Indeed, some of the 37 players observed reached their individual best MSS during the match and not during the test 38 (e.g. 25 players). Their %MSS was thus settled to 100%, increasing also the variability in-39 between players. Al Haddad et al. (3) found a strong correlation between MSStest and %MSS 40 reached during matches (e.g. r=0.69) that was not confirmed in the present study. The means 41 of the playing positions we observed were all above 90% of %MSS during matches while 42 some of theirs were below 90% (e.g. CD, CM and what they called the second striker). They 43 observed young players of 15.0±1.2 years old while we observed adults (24.3±2.6 years). As 44 the age influences the speed abilities (10,30,32), differences between our two studies might 45 be related to the different population observed. Furthermore, their players were certainly in 46 their growth period and their MSS was not fully developed with the same level of maturity 47 for every player. 48 49 Match vs. SSG 50

J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Sep 23. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

8

The second aim of the present study was to compare the MSS reached during match play 1 and training including SSG with different rules and formats. The MSSmatch (28.66±1.93 km.h-2 1) were found to be higher than the MSSSSG in all situations (mean 23.98±3.26 km.h-1 from 3 19.94±2.14 to 25.67±3.39 km.h-1; p<0.01). The mean average of MSSSSG reached was 4 23.64±3.08 km.h-1 representing 82.67±10.74 % of MSSmatch (from 69.75 to 89.81%). 5 Casamichana et al. (12) found similar results comparing the physical activity of a friendly 6 match and 3 SSG formats (3 vs. 3, 5 vs. 5 and 7 vs. 7). Over semi-professional players, they 7 found that MSSmatch was clearly higher (∼27.0 km.h-1) than mean MSSSSG (∼20.3 km.h-1). So 8 it was clear that the match situation made players reached a higher MSS than different SSG 9 situations. These observations were probably related to the different context (competition vs. 10 training) as competition may have more stake and motivational aspects with a bigger pitch 11 area giving more space for players to take speed. Furthermore, it is important to clarify that, 12 while modulating SSG rules and pitch area might make enable greater speeds, the stimulus of 13 SSG alone might not be enough to maintain or build maximal speed in soccer players. Thus, 14 coaches are advised to include additional specific speed drills to SGG in order to prepare 15 players for competition with a suitable stimulus of MSS. 16

Differences were observed amongst the playing positions as WD and WM were both 17 faster than CM (p<0.001, ES=0.28) and WD was also faster than CD (p<0.001, ES=0.28). 18 The small effect observed might be explained by the fact that some SSG situations (situations 19 without GK) did not require players to occupy a specific position on the pitch. For example, 20 while playing a 5 vs. 5 “ball-conservation”, all players positioned like they wanted on the 21 pitch and consequently had the same motion characteristics. What was observed and 22 discussed above about the differences in the MSSmatch amongst playing positions was also 23 observed here with the MSSSSG since central players reached lower speed than wide players 24 in match and SSG situations. As the purpose of training is mainly to specifically prepare 25 players for the competition, these observations confirmed that SSG are well adapted to 26 specifically train elite players for the high-speed physical activity according to their playing 27 position. It was also observed that CM (86.70±8.98%) reached a higher %MSSmatch than CD 28 (77.62±12.30%) and WD (82.10±10.11%) during the SSG situations (p<0.005) probably 29 because they are concerned both in offensive and defensive phases. In the present study the 30 SSG was recorded without any specific tactical aspects, but this component should greatly 31 affect the physical activities. The tactical options that coach chose induced different 32 defensive and offensive roles and would have affected differently each playing position. 33 Thus, although the present study did not focus on tactical SSG requirements, coaches need to 34 have a special attention to this component. 35

36 The present study was the first one to observe the influence of the rules, the number of 37

players involved and the pitch sizes on the MSS during SSG. Rules of the situations were 38 found to have a role in the difference of MSSSSG. In the first place, the situations with goal-39 scoring (with goalkeeper or with mini-goals) situations offered a higher MSSSSG than ball 40 conservation. These findings might be explained by the fact that goal-scoring situations 41 induced to be organized and play similarly to match-play, and therefore players needed to run 42 faster to create goal situations; whereas during the ball-conservations, the technical and 43 tactical skills with a continuously high intensity activity might predominate over the high-44 speed running activity. Several authors suggested that the presence of goals and goalkeepers 45 might be more motivating and so increased players’ involvement into the sided-games (17). 46 This motivational aspect could have also influenced the MSS reached during the sided-47 games. Furthermore, as players had to simultaneously protect their own goal while trying to 48 score, a higher physical activity was imposed during the SSG with goals (2) making these 49 higher speed running having more impact on the games. In the second place, the pitch area 50

J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Sep 23. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

9

per player (r=0.45) and the use of pitch length (r=0.53) were also influent on the MSSSSG. 1 The bigger the area per player, the higher MSSSSG; and the longer the pitch, the higher 2 MSSSSG. These findings were also in accordance with current literature, which stated an 3 increase of physical activity with pitch size as players had more space to cover while 4 attempting to attack (score or conserving the ball) or defend (getting back the ball or 5 protecting their own goal) (2). Finally, the number of players involved also had a significant 6 influence on MSSSSG (r=0.38; p<0.05). The more players, the higher MSSSSG. These findings 7 were in accordance with the current literature and confirmed what authors observed over high 8 intensity activity (13,26,33,35). The more players involved, the more the SSG situations were 9 close to the match situation and the more MSSSSG were close to MSSmatch. The present study 10 confirmed the current finding about the high intensity activity of during training and match, 11 and was the first one to observe the MSS reached during SSG of elite soccer players. 12 13 From the data it can be concluded that no differences were observed between elite 14 professional players vs. elite amateur players in the MSS reached during matches. 15 Differences were observed between playing positions, as wide players reached higher MSS 16 than central players, probably because they are more frequently involved in decisive actions 17 to unbalance the opponent and create goal situations. Differences were also observed 18 between the MSS reached during match play when compared to SSG. The analysis of the 19 SSG rules revealed that the closer the SSG was to the match situation in term of surface area, 20 number of players involved and the presence of goals and GKs, the closer the MSSSSG was to 21 the MSSmatch. During the sided-games, wide players reached a higher MSSSSG than central 22 players, confirming the relevance of SSG as specific soccer training drills. 23 24 PRACTICAL APPLICATION 25

Current findings might help individuals involved within the physical preparation of 26 players (e.g. technical coaches, fitness coaches, and sport science staff) when developing 27 training programs and training sessions in line with the playing positions, and with the levels 28 of high speed running targeted to reach during specific training drills like sided-games. 29 Indeed, the closer to match-play situations regarding the rules with goals, goalkeepers, the 30 larger pitch sizes and greater number of players involved, the higher sprinting speed running 31 players would reach during sided-games. However, coaches are advised to add specific speed 32 drills to sided-games in order to elicit a stimulus of high-speed running high enough to 33 prepare players for competition. 34

35 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 36 The authors want to thank all the staff and players involved in the study. The authors 37 also want to state that the results of the present study do not constitute endorsement of the 38 product by the authors of the NSCA. 39 40 REFERENCES 41

1. Andrzejewski, M, Chmura, J, Pluta, B, and Konarski, JM. Sprinting activities and distance covered by 42 top level Europa league soccer players. Int J Sports Sci Coaching 10(1): 39-51, 2015. 43

2. Aguiar, M, Botelho, G, Lago, C, Maças, V, and Sampaio J. Review on the effects of soccer small-sided 44 games. J Hum Kin 33: 103-113, 2012. 45

3. Al Haddad, H, Simpson, BM, Buchheit, M, Di Salvo, V, and Mendez-Villanueva, A. Peak match speed 46 and maximal sprinting speed in youth players: effect of age and playing position. Int J Sports Physio 47 Perf 10(7): 888-896, 2015. 48

4. Arcos, A, Vazquez, JS, Martin, J, Lerga, J, Sanchez, F, Villagra, F, and Zulueta JJ. Effects of small-49 sided games vs. Interval training in aerobic in fitness and physical enjoyment in young elite soccer 50 players. PloS One 10(9): e0137224, 2015. 51

5. Arnason, A, Sigurdsson, SB, Gudmundsson, A, Holme, I, Engebretsen, L, and Bahr, R. Physical 52

J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Sep 23. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

10

fitness, injuries, and team performance in soccer. Med Sci Sports Exerc 36(2): 278-285, 2004. 1 6. Barbero-Alvarez, JC, Coutts, A, Granda, J, Barbero-Alvarez, V, and Castagna, C. The validity and 2

reliability of a global positioning satellite system device to assess speed and repeated sprint ability 3 (RSA) in athletes. J Sci Med Sport 13: 232–235, 2010. 4

7. Bradley, PS, Sheldon, W, Wooster, B, Olsen, P, Boanas, P, and Krustrup, P. High-intensity running in 5 English FA Premier League soccer matches. J Sports Sci 27: 159–168, 2009. 6

8. Bradley, PS, Mascio, MD, Peart, D, Olsen, P, and Sheldon, B. High- intensity activity profiles of elite 7 soccer players at different performance levels. J Strength Cond Res 24: 2343–2351, 2010. 8

9. Brandes, M, Heitmann, A, and Müller, L. Physical responses of different small-sided game formats in 9 elite youth soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 26: 1353–1360, 2012. 10

10. Buchheit, M, Mendez-Villanueva, A, Simpson, BM, and Bourdon, PC. Match running performance 11 and fitness in youth soccer. Int J Sports Med 31: 818–825, 2010. 12

11. Buchheit, M, Al Haddad, H, Simpson, BM, Palazzi, D, Bourdon, PC, Di Salvo, V, and Mendez-13 Villanueva, A. Monitoring accelerations with GPS in football: time to slow down. Int J Sports Physiol 14 Perform 9: 442-445, 2014. 15

12. Casamichana, D, Castellano, J. and Castagna, C. Comparing the physical demands of friendly matches 16 and small-sided games in semi professional soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 26(3): 837-843, 2012. 17

13. Casamichana, D, Román-Quintana, JS, Castellano, J, and Calleja-González, J. Influence of the type of 18 marking and the number of players on physiological and physical demands during sided games in 19 soccer. J Human Kin 47: 259-268, 2015. 20

14. Cohen, J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. (2nd ed.) Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence 21 Erlbaum, 1988. 22

15. Cometti, G, Maffiuletti, NA, Pousson, M, Chatard, JC, and Maffulli, N. Iso-kinetic strength and 23 anaerobic power of elite, subelite and amateur French soccer players. Int J Sports Med 22: 45–51, 24 2001. 25

16. Coutts, AJ, and Duffield, R. Validity and reliability of GPS devices for measuring movement demands 26 of team sports. J Sci Med Sport 13: 133–135, 2010. 27

17. Dellal, A, Chamari, K, Pintus, A, Girard, O, Cotte, T, and Keller, D. Heart rate responses during small-28 sided and short intermittent running training in elite soccer players: a comparative study. J Strength 29 Cond Res 22(5): 1449-1457, 2008. 30

18. Dellal, A, Wong, DP, Moalla, W, and Chamari, K. Physical and technical activity of soccer players in 31 the French first league – with special reference to their playing position. Int J Sport Med 11(2): 278-32 290, 2010. 33

19. Dellal, A, Hill-Haas, S, Lago-Penas, C, and Chamari K. Small-sided games in soccer: amateur vs. 34 professional players’ physiological responses, physical, and technical activities. J Strength Cond Res 35 25(9): 237-281, 2011. 36

20. Dellal, A, Chamari, K, Owen, A, Wong, Del P, Lago-Penas, C, and Hill-Haas, S. Influence of technical 37 instructions on the physiological and physical demands of small-sided soccer games. Eur J Sport Sci 38 11(5): 341-346, 2011. 39

21. Di Salvo, V, Baron, R, Gonzalez-Haro, C, Gormasz, C, Pigozzi, F, and Bachl, N. Sprinting analysis of 40 elite soccer players during European Champions League and UEFA Cup matches. J Sports Sci 28: 41 1489–1494, 2010. 42

22. Evans, JD. Straightforward statistics for the behavioural sciences. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole 43 Publishing, 1996. 44

23. Faude, O, Koch, T, and Meyer, T. Straight sprinting is the most frequent action in goal situations in 45 professional football. J Sports Sci 30: 625–631, 2012. 46

24. Ferro, A, Villacieros, J, Floria, P, and Graupera, JL. Analysis of speed performance in soccer by 47 playing position and a sports level using a laser system. J Hum Kin 44: 143-153, 2014. 48

25. Girard, O, Mendez-Villanueva, A, and Bishop, D. Repeated-sprint ability - part I: factors contributing 49 to fatigue. Sports Med 41(8): 673– 694, 2011. 50

26. Hill-Haas, S, Coutts, A, Rowsell, G, and Dawson, B. Variability of acute physiological responses and 51 performance profiles of youth soccer players in small-sided games. J Sci Med Sport 11: 487-490, 2008. 52

27. Hill-Haas, SV, Dawson, B, Impellizzeri, FM, and Coutts, AJ. Physiology of small-sided games training 53 in foot- ball: a systematic review. Sports Med 41: 199–220, 2011. 54

28. Kaplan, T, Erkmen, N, and Taskin, H. The evaluation of the running speed and agility performance in 55 professional and amateur soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 23(3): 774-778, 2009. 56

29. Lago-Penas, C, Casais, L, Dellal, A, Rey, E, and Dominguez, E. Anthropometric and physiological 57 characteristics of young soccer players according to their playing positions: relevance for competition 58 success. J Strenght Cond Res 25(12): 3358-3367, 2011. 59

30. Le Gall, F, Carling, C, Williams, M, and Reilly, T. Anthropometric and fitness characteristics of 60

J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Sep 23. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

11

international, professional and amateur male graduate soccer players from an elite youth academy. J 1 Sci Med Sport 13: 90–95, 2010. 2

31. Mendez-Villanueva, A, Buchheit, M, Simpson, B, Peltola, E, and Bourdon P. Does on-field sprinting 3 performance in young soccer players depend on how fast they can run or how fast they do run? J 4 Strength Cond Res 25: 2634–2638, 2011. 5

32. Mendez-Villanueva, A, Buchheit, M, Kuitunen, S, Douglas, A, Peltola, E, and Bourdon P. Age-related 6 differences in acceleration, maximum running speed, and repeated-sprint performance in young soccer 7 players. J Sports Sci 29: 477–484, 2011. 8

33. Owen, AL, Wong, DP, Paul, D, and Dellal, A. Physical and technical comparisons between various-9 sided games within professional soccer. Int J Sports Med 35: 286–292, 2014. 10

34. Rampinini, E, Coutts, AJ, Castagna, C, Sassi, R, and Impellizzeri, FM. Variation in top level soccer 11 match performance. Int J Sports Med 28(12): 1018–1024, 2007. 12

35. Rampinini, E, Impellizzeri, FM, Castagna, C, Abt, G, Chamari, K, Sassi, A, and Marcora, SM. Factors 13 influencing physiological responses to small-sided soccer games. J Sports Sci 25(6): 659-666, 2007. 14

36. Rampinini, E, Sassi, A, Morelli, A, Mazzoni, S, Fanchini, M, and Coutts, AJ. Repeated-sprint ability in 15 professional and amateur soccer players. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 34(6): 1048-1054, 2009. 16

J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Sep 23. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

12

Table 1. Small-sided games details and rules 1

Type of SSG Rules Pitch size (m)

Area per player (m2)

11 vs. 11 + GK 102 x 66 306 10 vs. 10 + GK 60 x 50 150 9 vs. 9 + GK 70 x 55 212 9 vs. 9 + GK 50 x 60 166 8 vs. 8 + GK 60 x 40 150 8 vs. 8 Score in mini goals 60 x 50 185 8 vs. 8 Ball-conservation 45 x 50 140 7 vs. 7 Ball-conservation 40 x 50 142 7 vs. 7 + GK 34 x 38 92 6 vs. 6 + GK 50 x 60 166 6 vs. 6 + GK 40 x 40 133 5 vs. 5 + GK 40 x 36 142 5 vs. 5 Ball-conservation 50 x 40 166 5 vs. 5 Score in mini goals 40 x 30 120 4 vs. 4 + GK 40 x 42 210

SSG=small-sided-game, GK=goalkeeper 2

J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Sep 23. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

13

Table 2. Maximal and percentage of maximal sprinting speed reached by soccer players. 1

Variables Group CD WD CM WM FW All players

MSStest Pro m 30.59 31.02 30.89 31.54 32.26 30.93 (km.h-1) sd 1.08 1.26 1.42 0.99 1.18 1.37 MSStest Amateur m 30.55 32.18 31.47 31.60 30.76 31.41

(km.h-1) sd 0.99 1.28 1.78 1.72 1.42 1.60 MSStest Combined m 30.56 31.67 $ 31.12 31.81 $ 31.93$$$ 31.28

(km.h-1) sd 1.04 1.37 1.58 1.37 1.37 1.46 MSSmatch Pro m 27.95 29.13 28.17 30.12 30.18 28.60 (km.h-1) sd 4.00 2.15 2.62 1.59 1.94 2.89 MSSmatch Amateur m 29.00 30.70 28.06 29.39 29.28 29.07 (km.h-1) sd 2.49 2.02 2.21 2.96 1.80 2.47 MSSmatch Combined m 28.25 30.02 € 28.13 29.86 29.98 € 28.93 (km.h-1) sd 3.63 2.18 2.45 2.14 1.92 2.74

% MSS Pro m 91.32% 93.88% 91.16% 95.48% 93.58% 91.62% sd 12.37% 4.93% 7.01% 3.98% 5.80% 8.08%

% MSS Amateur m 94.98% 95.40% 89.28% 92.54% 95.15% 92.51% sd 8.17% 4.87% 6.74% 4.83% 2.81% 6.00%

% MSS Combined m 92.38% 94.74% 90.42% 93.88% 93.93% 92.45% sd 11.33% 4.85% 6.92% 4.99% 5.29% 7.49%

MSS=maximal sprinting speed, MSStest=tested MSS, MSSmatch= MSS reached in match, 2 CD=central defenders, WD=wide defenders, CM=central midfielders, WM=wide 3 midfielders, FW=forwards. 4 $ higher than CD for the same measure ($:p<0.05, $$:p<0.01, $$$:p<0.001) 5 € higher than CM for the same measure (p<0.05) 6

J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Sep 23. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

14

Table 3. Maximal sprinting speed of elite soccer players reached during different types of 1 small-sided games and a match 2

Playing positions CD WD CM WM FW All players

SSG types m sd m sd m sd m sd m sd m sd Match 29.53 1.34 30.25 1.48 26.48 0.95 29.40 0.57 27.00 0 28.66*£$ 1.93

10 vs. 10 + GK 23.07 0.32 25.95 1.54 24.10 1.64 23.20 5.37 27.00 0 24.49 2.31

9 vs. 9 + GK

(70x55m) 25.50 1.32 27.95 2.04 24.45 4.49 23.80 1.41 24.10 0 25.56£ 2.97

9 vs. 9 + GK

(50x60m) 22.30 3.29 27.40 1.32 23.70 2.10 26.35 1.20 27.30 0 25.09$ 2.80

8 vs. 8 + GK 25.30 2.21 25.70 1.56 23.83 1.98 26.45 1.63 25.10 0 25.14£ 1.82

8 vs. 8 (mini goals)

26.30 1.54 27.80 2.02 22.58 2.96 28.65 1.20 20.80 0 25.61 3.33

8 vs. 8 22.43 2.95 23.83 1.84 20.90 0.62 25.20 0.14 20.60 0 22.66 2.22 7 vs. 7 23.17 0.58 23.25 2.98 21.50 1.35 23.50 1.56 20.10 0 22.54 1.97

7 vs. 7 + GK 20.73 3.70 19.38 0.56 20.03 2.44 20.90 1.70 17.60 0 19.94 2.14

6 vs 6 + GK

(50x60m) 23.17 5.62 27.68 1.59 25.40 2.45 26.30 4.95 25.00 0 25.67£ 3.39

6 vs 6 + GK

(40x40m) 24.20 0.96 26.70 2.41 23.80 2.87 25.25 2.47 24.90 0 25.00£$ 2.31

5 vs. 5 + GK 24.40 4.68 23.13 3.59 22.95 1.95 21.05 0.35 23.50 0 23.08 2.88

5 vs. 5 17.27 0.91 22.93 2.29 22.00 1.02 22.15 1.34 19.90 0 21.12 2.58 5 vs. 5 (mini goals)

20.30 6.88 22.83 1.62 23.65 2.06 22.50 0.57 25.90 0 22.69 3.36

4 vs. 4 + GK 22.33 1.42 22.98 2.66 22.40 0.51 22.45 1.34 20.50 0 22.42 1.59

All SSG combined 22.89 3.53 24.82CMCD 3.12 22.95 2.44 24.13CM 2.81 23.02 3.04 23.64 3.08

CD=central defenders, WD=wide defenders, CM=central midfielders, WM=wide 3 midfielders, FW=forwards. 4 GK: presence of goals and goalkeepers 5 * Higher than all others SSG types (p<0.01); £ Higher than 7vs.7 + GK rule (p<0.0005); $ 6 Higher than 5vs.5 rule (p<0.0005) 7 CM Higher than CM (p<0.001); CD Higher than CD (p<0.001) 8

J Strength Cond Res. 2016 Sep 23. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001642

15

Table 4. Percentage of match maximal sprinting speed of elite soccer players reached during 1 different type of small-sided games 2

Playing positions CD WD CM WM FW All players

SSG types m sd m sd m sd m sd m sd m sd 10 vs. 10

+ GK 78.18 2.53 85.83 4.49 91.05 5.79 79.10 19.80 100.00 0 85.73 9.37

9 vs. 9 + GK

(70x55m) 86.40 4.35 92.33 3.23 92.14 14.82 81.01 6.37 89.26 0 89.17£ 8.77

9 vs. 9 + GK

(50x60m) 75.83 13.48 90.62 2.94 89.76 10.37 89.68 5.81 101.11 0 87.82£ 10.40

8 vs. 8 + GK 85.83 9.04 84.92 1.15 90.02 7.46 90.04 7.26 92.96 0 87.88£€ 6.13

8 vs. 8 (mini goals) 89.34 9.46 91.82 2.50 85.12 8.91 97.43 2.21 77.04 0 89.12 7.93

8 vs. 8 75.92 8.58 78.72 3.82 78.97 2.10 85.73 2.13 76.30 0 79.02 5.08 7 vs. 7 78.49 1.69 77.10 11.22 81.15 2.12 80.00 6.83 74.44 0 78.78 6.20 7 vs. 7 + GK 69.95 9.72 64.10 1.62 75.68 9.49 71.16 7.14 65.19 0 69.75 7.90

6 vs 6 + GK

(50x60m) 78.33 17.50 91.83 9.48 95.95 8.90 89.31 15.12 92.59 0 89.81£ 12.15

6 vs 6 + GK

(40x40m) 82.08 5.57 88.27 6.74 90.01 11.76 85.82 6.77 92.22 0 87.37£$ 7.86

5 vs. 5 + GK 82.45 13.64 76.43 11.37 86.68 6.61 71.60 0.18 87.04 0 80.72 10.08

5 vs. 5 58.50 2.91 75.89 7.84 83.23 5.88 75.31 3.12 73.70 0 74.02 10.35 5 vs. 5

(mini goals) 69.53 26.76 75.52 5.39 89.29 6.47 76.53 0.45 95.93 0 79.77 14.35

4 vs. 4 + GK 75.86 8.07 75.99 8.77 84.68 3.27 76.33 3.10 75.93 0 78.49 6.89

All SSG combined 77.62CM 12.30 82.10CM 10.11 86.70 8.98 82.07 9.62 85.26 11.27 82.67 10.74

CD=central defenders, WD=wide defenders, CM=central midfielders, WM=wide 3 midfielders, FW=forwards. 4 GK: presence of goals and goalkeepers 5 £ Higher than 7vs.7 + GK rule (p<0.0005); $ Higher than 5vs.5 rule (p<0.0005); € Higher than 6 8vs.8 (p<0.0005) 7 CM Lower than CM (p<0.005) 8