Figure - uploaded by Giacomo Cofano
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
This study aims to describe and analyse the
internal and external load deriving from LSG exercises
carried out on two fields, defined as SLSG and BLSG, in
the 4vs4 format, with goalkeepers. 22 professional soccer
players participated (average age: 23.59±4.87 years,
weight: 77.8±7.6 kg; height: 183.5±7.5 cm) including 20
forward players and 2...
Similar publications
Citations
... This study extends the analysis conducted in the literature on LSGs: in fact, this type of exercise manages to come very close to the match demands (Riboli et al., 2021;Cofano et al., 2021;Sannicandro et al., 2021). ...
Study purpose. This study aimed to describe, analyze and compare the high intensity in internal and external load deriving from Large-Sided Games (LSG) exercises during the 4vs4 and 5vs5 formats, with goalkeepers. Materials and methods. The study participants were 22 professional soccer players (average age: 23.59±4.87 years, weight: 77.8±7.6 kg; height: 183.5±7.5 cm). The 4vs4 + 2 goalkeepers format was performed on a 60x54 m field (324 m2per player), while the 5vs5 + 2 goalkeepers format was performed on a 65 x 60 m field (325 m2 per player). During the two LSG exercises, the internal load and the external load were analyzed. The LSG exercises were performed in 4 sets of 5 minutes each, with 2 minutes of passive recovery between each set. Results. The data obtained show that the 4vs4 is the LSG exercise that succeeds in ensuring high exercise intensity: the time spent between 90-100% of the Heart Rate (HR) is significantly higher than in the 5vs5 (p <.005). The average HR values (percentage and absolute) were also higher and significant (p <.05) in the 4vs4 LSG. The peak speed (p < .05), average metabolic power during exercise phases (p < .05) and sprint distance (p < .005) are higher in the 5vs5 LSG. Conclusions. By modulating the practice time, both formats can be used on the day after the match for those who did not play or on the match-day +3 for the whole team.
... To favor learning functional to the footballer of the future, but adequate to the footballer of the present, 6 stations have been provided for young footballers to practice at the same time: in fact, the quality of the learning environment and the intensity of the exercise are two key points of youth training in football (García-Angulo et al., 2019;Sannicandro et al., 2021;Harley et al., 2010). ...
... These types of exercises ensure that task constraints during learning require perceptual-action relationships similar to those needed in competitive performance (Renshaw et al., 2010;Sannicandro & Cofano, 2019;Sannicandro et al., 2021). For these exercises it is possible to identify different dynamics and different presentation methods (Table 1). ...
Background
Sided games (i.e., small sided, medium sided, large sided) involve tactical, technical, physical, and psychological elements and are commonly implemented in soccer training. Although soccer sided-games research is plentiful, a meta-analytical synthesis of external load exposure during sided games is lacking.
Objective
The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to: (1) synthesize the evidence on high-speed and sprint running exposure induced by sided games in adult soccer players, (2) establish pooled estimates and intra-individual reliability for high-speed and sprint running exposure, and (3) explore the moderating effects of game format and playing constraints.
Methods
A literature search was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines. Four databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science Core Collection) were systematically searched up to 25 January, 2022. Eligibility criteria were adult soccer players (population); training programs incorporating sided games (intervention); game manipulations including number of players, pitch dimension, and game orientation (comparator); and high-speed, very high-speed, and sprint relative (m⋅min−1) running distances and associated intra-individual reliability (outcome). Eligible study risk of bias was evaluated using RoBANS. Pooled estimates for high-speed and sprint running exposure, and their intra-individual reliability, along with the moderating effect of tracking device running velocity thresholds, pitch dimension (i.e., area per player), and game orientation (i.e. score or possession), were determined via a multi-level mixed-effects meta-analysis. Estimate uncertainty is presented as 95% compatibility intervals (CIs) with the likely range of relative distances in similar future studies determined via 95% prediction intervals.
Results
A total of 104 and 7 studies met our eligibility criteria for the main and reliability analyses, respectively. The range of relative distances covered across small-sided games, medium-sided games, and large-sided games was 14.8 m⋅min−1 (95% CI 12.3–17.4) to 17.2 m⋅min−1 (95% CI 13.5–20.8) for high-speed running, 2.7 m⋅min−1 (95% CI 1.8–3.5) to 3.6 m⋅min−1 (95% CI 2.3–4.8) for very high-speed running, and 0.2 m⋅min−1 (95% CI 0.1–0.4) to 0.7 m⋅min−1 (95% CI 0.5–0.9) for sprinting. Across different game formats, 95% prediction intervals showed future exposure for high-speed, very high-speed running, and sprinting to be 0–46.5 m⋅min−1, 0–14.2 m⋅min−1, and 0–2.6 m⋅min−1, respectively. High-speed, very high-speed running, and sprinting showed poor reliability with a pooled coefficient of variation of 22.8% with distances being moderated by device speed thresholds, pitch dimension, and game orientation.
Conclusions
This review is the first to provide a detailed synthesis of exposure and intra-individual reliability of high-speed and sprint running during soccer sided games. Our estimates, along with the moderating influence of common programming variables such as velocity thresholds, area per player, and game orientation should be considered for informed planning of small-sided games, medium-sided games, and large-sided games soccer training.
Clinical Trial Registration
Open Science Framework available through https://osf.io/a4xr2/.
Background: Sided-games (i.e., small- [SSG], medium- [MSG], large-sided [LSG]) involve tactical, technical, physical and psychological elements and are commonly implemented in soccer training. Although soccer sided-games research is plentiful, a meta-analytical synthesis of external load exposure during sided-games is lacking.
Objective: The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to: 1) synthesise the evidence on high-speed and sprint running exposure induced by sided-games in adult soccer players, 2) establish pooled estimates and intra-individual reliability for high-speed and sprint running exposure, and 3) explore the moderating effects of game format and playing constraints.
Methods: A literature search was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines. Four databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science) were systematically searched up to 25 January 2022. Eligibility criteria were adult soccer players (population); training programmes incorporating sided-games (intervention); game manipulations including number of players, pitch dimension, game orientation (comparator); and high-, very high-speed and sprint relative (m∙min-1) running distances and associated intra-individual reliability (outcome). Eligible study risk of bias was evaluated using RoBANS. Pooled estimates for high-speed and sprint running exposure, and their intra-individual reliability, along with the moderating effect of tracking device running velocity thresholds, pitch dimension (i.e., area per player), and game orientation (i.e., score or possession), were determined via multilevel mixed effects meta-analysis. Estimate uncertainty is presented as 95% compatibility intervals (CI) with the likely range of relative distances in similar future studies determined via 95% prediction intervals (PI).
Results: A total of 104 and 7 studies met our eligibility criteria for the main and reliability analyses, respectively. The range of relative distances covered across SSG, MSG and LSG was 14.8 m∙min-1 (95% CI: 12.3 to 17.4) to 17.2 m∙min-1 (95% CI: 13.5 to 20.8) for high-speed running, 2.7 m∙min-1 (95% CI: 1.8 to 3.5) to 3.6 m∙min-1 (95% CI: 2.3 to 4.8) for very high-speed running, and 0.2 m∙min-1 (95% CI: 0.1 to 0.4) to 0.7 m∙min-1 (95% CI: 0.5 to 0.9) for sprinting. Across different game formats, 95% PI’s showed future exposure for high-speed, very high-speed running, and sprinting to be from 0 m∙min-1 to 46.5 m∙min-1, 0 m∙min-1 to 14.2 m∙min-1, and 0 m∙min-1 to 2.6 m∙min-1, respectively. High-speed, very high-speed running, and sprinting showed poor reliability with a pooled coefficient of variation of 22.8% with distances being moderated by device speed thresholds, pitch dimension and game orientation.
Conclusions: This study is the first to provide a detailed synthesis of exposure and intra-individual reliability of high-speed and sprint running during soccer sided-games. Our estimates, along with the moderating influence of common programming variables such as velocity thresholds, area per player and game orientation should be considered for informed planning of SSG, MSG and LSG soccer training.
