E-Thesis 178 views 34 downloads
Investigating the Effectiveness of Small Sided Games, to Prepare Professional Football Players for the Locomotor Demands, During a Worst-Case Scenario on a Match Day / WILLIAM GILL
Swansea University Author: WILLIAM GILL
PDF | E-Thesis – open access
Copyright: The author, Willam Gill, 2022.Download (909.14KB)
Aim: To compare the worst-case scenario (WCS) movement demands of football match play compared to the WCS of small sided games (SSGs) undertaken in training sessions, to evaluate the effectiveness of SSGs to prepare players for the locomotor demands of a WCS on a match day.Methods: 27 Male professio...
|Degree level:||Master of Research|
|Degree name:||MSc by Research|
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Aim: To compare the worst-case scenario (WCS) movement demands of football match play compared to the WCS of small sided games (SSGs) undertaken in training sessions, to evaluate the effectiveness of SSGs to prepare players for the locomotor demands of a WCS on a match day.Methods: 27 Male professional football players (age (18.9 ± 2.5 years), height (180.4 ± 10.3cm),body mass (74.1 ± 9.2kg)) from an English Championship football club wore 10Hz GPS systemsduring 26 in season competitive league fixtures, and in all training sessions throughout the courseof the 4-week data collection period, resulting in 7 SSGs being included in the study. Players were categorised by playing position (Centre back (CB), Full back (FB), Central midfielder (CM), Winger(W), & Striker (S)). During match play and SSGs, players locomotor outputs for total distance (TD), high speed running (HSR), sprint distance (SD) and intensity (M/Min), for a rolling epochlength of 300s. Results: Regardless of playing position, WCS movement demands for SSGs greatly underestimated the match play WCS movement demands of players for all measured locomotoroutputs (P≤0.001); TD (match play: 630.5 ± 53m, SSG: 502.2 ± 48.8m), HSR (match play: 89.3 ± 27.5m, SSG: 14.7 ± 7.9m), SD (match play: 29.5 ± 12.2m, SSG:0.9 ± 2.2m), & intensity (matchplay: 126.6 ± 10.5m/min, SSG: 100.4 ± 9.8m/min). Inter-positionally, CB (23.0%) and FB (16.3%)displayed the greatest underestimation in all physical parameters obtained in SSG WCS, comparedto match play WCS, with all positions having significantly greater match play WCS movement demands compared to the baseline of CB (P≤0.01). When evaluating position specific match play WCS locomotor outputs, S showed highest demands for HSR (133.6 ± 13.5m), SD (57.6 ± 3.7m),& intensity (134.6 ± 3.4m/min) (P≤0.001), whilst W displayed the highest demand of TD (655.1± 24.3m (P<0.01)). No significant positional differences were found during SSG WCS. Matchresult had no significant impact on match play WCS demands, and training session theme had nosignificant effect on SSG WCS movement demands. Conclusion: This study shows that WCSmovement demands of SSGs in training drastically underestimate the WCS movement demandselicited by players during football match play, providing vital insight into the locomotor demandsof players during WCS on a match day.
Copyright: The author, William J. Gill, 2022.
Football, Soccer, Sport, Training, Small-Sided Games, Sport Science, Strength and Conditioning, Worst-Case Scenario, Periodisation, Coaching, Elite Sport, Athletics
Faculty of Science and Engineering