Soccer is the most popular sport in the world and is performed by men and women, children and adults with different levels of expertise. Soccer performance depends upon a myriad of factors such as technical/biomechanical, tactical, mental and physiological areas. One of the reasons that soccer is so popular worldwide is that players may not need to have an extraordinary capacity within any of these performance areas, but possess a reasonable level within all areas. However, there are trends towards more systematic training and selection influencing the anthropometric profiles of players who compete at the highest level. As with other activities, soccer is not a science, but science may help improve performance. Efforts to improve soccer performance often focus on technique and tactics at the expense of physical fitness. During a 90-minute game, elite-level players run about 10 km at an average intensity close to the anaerobic threshold (80-90% of maximal heart rate). Within this endurance context, numerous explosive bursts of activity are required, including jumping, kicking, tackling, turning, sprinting, changing pace, and sustaining forceful contractions to maintain balance and control of the ball against defensive pressure. The best teams continue to increase their physical capacities, whilst the less well ranked have similar values as reported 30 years ago. Whether this is a result of fewer assessments and training resources, selling the best players, and/or knowledge of how to perform effective exercise training regimens in less well ranked teams, is not known. As there do exist teams from lower divisions with as high aerobic capacity as professional teams, the latter factor probably plays an important role. This article provides an update on the physiology of soccer players and referees, and relevant physiological tests. It also gives examples of effective strength- and endurance-training programmes to improve on-field performance. The cited literature has been accumulated by computer searching of relevant databases and a review of the authors' extensive files. From a total of 9893 papers covering topics discussed in this article, 843 were selected for closer scrutiny, excluding studies where information was redundant, insufficient or the experimental design was inadequate. In this article, 181 were selected and discussed. The information may have important implications for the safety and success of soccer players and hopefully it should be understood and acted upon by coaches and individual soccer players.

http://carlocapelli.it/ftp/didattica/master calcio/bibliografia_essenziale/stolen_et_al_2005.pdf

Physiology of Soccer: An Update

Thank you for downloading textbook of work physiology physiological bases of exercise. As you may know, people have look hundreds times for their chosen novels like this textbook of work physiology physiological bases of exercise, but end up in infectious downloads. Rather than reading a good book with a cup of tea in the afternoon, instead they cope with some harmful virus inside their desktop computer.

Textbook Of Work Physiology Physiological Bases Of Exercise

Small-sided games (SSGs) are played on reduced pitch areas, often using modified rules and involving a smaller number of players than traditional football. These games are less structured than traditional fitness training methods but are very popular training drills for players of all ages and levels. At present, there is relatively little information regarding how SSGs can best be used to improve physical capacities and technical or tactical skills in footballers. However, many prescriptive variables controlled by the coach can influence the exercise intensity during SSGs. Coaches usually attempt to change the training stimulus in SSGs through altering the pitch area, player number, coach encouragement, training regimen (continuous vs interval training), rules and the use of goalkeepers. In general, it appears that SSG exercise intensity is increased with the concurrent reduction in player number and increase in relative pitch area per player. However, the inverse relationship between the number of players in each SSG and exercise intensity does not apply to the time-motion characteristics. Consistent coach encouragement can also increase training intensity, but most rule changes do not appear to strongly affect exercise intensity. The variation of exercise intensity measures are lower in smaller game formats (e.g. three vs three) and have acceptable reproducibility when the same game is repeated between different training sessions or within the same session. The variation in exercise intensity during SSGs can also be improved with consistent coach encouragement but it is still more variable than traditional generic training methods. Other studies have also shown that SSGs containing fewer players can exceed match intensity and elicit similar intensities to both long- and short-duration high-intensity interval running. It also appears that fitness and football-specific performance can be improved equally with SSG and generic training drills. Future research is required to examine the optimal periodization strategies of SSGs training for the long-term development of physiological capacity, technical skill and tactical proficiency.

/pdf/physiology-of-small-sided-games-training-in-football-a-3hmed94s18.pdf

Physiology of small-sided games training in football: a systematic review.

High-intensity interval training (HIT) is a well-known, time-efficient training method for improving cardiorespiratory and metabolic function and, in turn, physical performance in athletes. HIT involves repeated short (<45 s) to long (2–4 min) bouts of rather high-intensity exercise interspersed with recovery periods (refer to the previously published first part of this review). While athletes have used ‘classical’ HIT formats for nearly a century (e.g. repetitions of 30 s of exercise interspersed with 30 s of rest, or 2–4-min interval repetitions ran at high but still submaximal intensities), there is today a surge of research interest focused on examining the effects of short sprints and all-out efforts, both in the field and in the laboratory. Prescription of HIT consists of the manipulation of at least nine variables (e.g. work interval intensity and duration, relief interval intensity and duration, exercise modality, number of repetitions, number of series, between-series recovery duration and intensity); any of which has a likely effect on the acute physiological response. Manipulating HIT appropriately is important, not only with respect to the expected middle- to long-term physiological and performance adaptations, but also to maximize daily and/or weekly training periodization. Cardiopulmonary responses are typically the first variables to consider when programming HIT (refer to Part I). However, anaerobic glycolytic energy contribution and neuromuscular load should also be considered to maximize the training outcome. Contrasting HIT formats that elicit similar (and maximal) cardiorespiratory responses have been associated with distinctly different anaerobic energy contributions. The high locomotor speed/power requirements of HIT (i.e. ≥95 % of the minimal velocity/power that elicits maximal oxygen uptake [v/p
 $$ \dot{V} $$
 O2max] to 100 % of maximal sprinting speed or power) and the accumulation of high-training volumes at high-exercise intensity (runners can cover up to 6–8 km at v
 $$ \dot{V} $$
 O2max per session) can cause significant strain on the neuromuscular/musculoskeletal system. For athletes training twice a day, and/or in team sport players training a number of metabolic and neuromuscular systems within a weekly microcycle, this added physiological strain should be considered in light of the other physical and technical/tactical sessions, so as to avoid overload and optimize adaptation (i.e. maximize a given training stimulus and minimize musculoskeletal pain and/or injury risk). In this part of the review, the different aspects of HIT programming are discussed, from work/relief interval manipulation to HIT periodization, using different examples of training cycles from different sports, with continued reference to the cardiorespiratory adaptations outlined in Part I, as well as to anaerobic glycolytic contribution and neuromuscular/musculoskeletal load.

High-Intensity Interval Training, Solutions to the Programming Puzzle

Historically, the ability of coaches to prescribe training to achieve optimal athletic performance can be attributed to many years of personal experience. A more modern approach is to adopt scientific methods in the development of optimal training programmes. However, there is not much research in this area, particularly into the quantification of training programmes and their effects on physiological adaptation and subsequent performance. Several methods have been used to quantify training load, including questionnaires, diaries, physiological monitoring and direct observation. More recently, indices of training stress have been proposed, including the training impulse, which uses heart rate measurements and training load, and session rating of perceived exertion measurements, which utilizes subjective perception of effort scores and duration of exercise. Although physiological adaptations to training are well documented, their influence on performance has not been accurately quantified. To date, no single physiological marker has been identified that can measure the fitness and fatigue responses to exercise or accurately predict performance. Models attempting to quantify the relationship between training and performance have been proposed, many of which consider the athlete as a system in which the training load is the input and performance the system output. Although attractive in concept, the accuracy of these theoretical models has proven poor. A possible reason may be the absence of a measure of individuality in each athlete's response to training. Thus, in the future more attention should be directed towards measurements that reflect individual capacity to respond or adapt to exercise training rather than an absolute measure of changes in physiological variables that occur with training.

/pdf/the-quantification-of-training-load-the-training-response-5fgqjgpofg.pdf

The Quantification of Training Load, the Training Response and the Effect on Performance

High-speed actions
are known to impact soccer performance and can be categorized
into actions requiring maximal speed, acceleration, or
agility. Contradictory findings have been reported as to the extent
of the relationship between the different speed components.
This study comprised 106 professional soccer players who were
assessed for 10-m sprint (acceleration), flying 20-m sprint (maximum
speed), and zigzag agility performance. Although performances
in the three tests were all significantly correlated (p ,
0.0005), coefficients of determination (r2) between the tests were
just 39, 12, and 21% for acceleration and maximum speed, acceleration
and agility, and maximum speed and agility, respectively.
Based on the low coefficients of determination, it was concluded
that acceleration, maximum speed, and agility are specific
qualities and relatively unrelated to one another. The findings
suggest that specific testing and training procedures for
each speed component should be utilized when working with
elite players.

/pdf/specificity-of-acceleration-maximum-speed-and-agility-in-1nldkz68mz.pdf

Specificity of acceleration, maximum speed and agility in professional soccer players

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of different modes of stretching within a pre-exercise warm-up on high-speed motor capacities important to soccer performance. Eighteen professional soccer players were tested for countermovement vertical jump, stationary 10-m sprint, flying 20-m sprint, and agility performance after different warm-ups consisting of static stretching, dynamic stretching, or no stretching. There was no significant difference among warm-ups for the vertical jump: mean +/- SD data were 40.4 +/- 4.9 cm (no stretch), 39.4 +/- 4.5 cm (static), and 40.2 +/- 4.5 cm (dynamic). The dynamic-stretch protocol produced significantly faster 10-m sprint times than did the no-stretch protocol: 1.83 +/- 0.08 seconds (no stretch), 1.85 +/- 0.08 seconds (static), and 1.87 +/- 0.09 seconds (dynamic). The dynamic- and static-stretch protocols produced significantly faster flying 20-m sprint times than did the no-stretch protocol: 2.41 +/- 0.13 seconds (no stretch), 2.37 +/- 0.12 seconds (static), and 2.37 +/- 0.13 seconds (dynamic). The dynamic-stretch protocol produced significantly faster agility performance than did both the no-stretch protocol and the static-stretch protocol: 5.20 +/- 0.16 seconds (no stretch), 5.22 +/- 0.18 seconds (static), and 5.14 +/- 0.17 seconds (dynamic). Static stretching does not appear to be detrimental to high-speed performance when included in a warm-up for professional soccer players. However, dynamic stretching during the warm-up was most effective as preparation for subsequent high-speed performance.

/pdf/effects-of-differential-stretching-protocols-during-warm-ups-33md3exfhi.pdf

Effects of differential stretching protocols during warm-ups on high-speed motor capacities in professional soccer players.

Recent evidence supports the use of certain soccer drills for combined technical and physical training. Therefore, it is important to be able to accurately monitor training intensity during soccer drills intended for physical development to allow the optimization of training parameters. Twenty-eight professional soccer players were assessed for heart rate (HR) and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) responses to 5 commonly used soccer training drills (2v2 to 8v8 drills). The responses of both HR and RPE differed significantly (p < 0.05) between the drills, generally showing an elevated response to drills involving lower player numbers. However, the 2v2 drill showed a significantly (p < 0.05) lower HR response (mean +/- SD: 88.7 +/- 1.2% HRmax) than 3v3 (91.2 +/- 1.3% HRmax) and 4v4 drills (90.2 +/- 1.6% HRmax). There was no significant correlation between the HR and RPE responses to the various drills (r = 0.60, p = 0.200). This poor relationship is probably because during the 2v2 drill, RPE was higher than during any of the other 6 drills, whereas HR was only fourth highest of the 6 drills. This demonstrates that HR and RPE are only poorly related during the intense drills used in this study, and that HR underestimates the intensity of the 2v2 drill. Heart rate demonstrated lower intersubject variability (1.3-2.2%) than RPE (5.1-9.9%). However, unlike HR, Borg 15-point RPE appears to be a valid marker of exercise intensity over a wide range of soccer training drills by maintaining validity in all drills and demonstrating acceptable intersubject variability. A combination of both HR- and RPE-based training load calculations appears optimal for use in soccer training.

Measures of exercise intensity during soccer training drills with professional soccer players

Recent evidence suggests that certain soccer drills produce exercise intensities suitable for physical conditioning. However, it remains debatable whether soccer drills can provide a sufficiently unified exercise intensity among different players and on repetition of a drill, because movement patterns cannot be externally controlled during soccer drills. Good reliability and low variability of exercise intensity would enable all players to receive an appropriate training stimulus. The purpose of this study was to investigate intersubject variability and intrasubject reliability in exercise intensity during soccer drills. It was hypothesized that soccer drills that involve the highest exercise intensities would demonstrate the lowest intersubject variability and the highest intrasubject reliability. Heart rates of 23 professional soccer players were recorded during a range of soccer training drills. The drills consisted of 2 vs. 2 to 8 vs. 8 normal scoring games and 2 further possession games. Heart rate responses were examined for variability, reliability, and suitability for soccer endurance training. Coefficients of variation across players were less than 3% for all drills. Paired t-tests showed no significant differences in heart rate on repetition of the drills and 95% ratio limits of agreement were 1.8-3.8%. There were no significant correlations between exercise intensity and the statistical measures of variability and reliability. Several drills produced exercise intensities suitable for soccer endurance training with mean heart rate responses ranging from 87-91% HRmax. Soccer drills such as those used in the present study appear to be an adequate substitute for physical training without the ball and thus provide simultaneous skill and fitness training. The increase in training time spent developing technical ability and/or a reduction in total training time required may be useful for soccer teams.

/pdf/suitability-of-soccer-training-drills-for-endurance-training-39531e22gy.pdf

Suitability of soccer training drills for endurance training

The purpose of this study was to examine the physiological effects of different sprint repetition protocols on professional footballers. Of particular interest were the abilities of repeated sprint protocols to induce fatigue to an extent observed during competitive soccer. Six professional soccer players were assessed for fatigue rate and physiological responses of heart rate (HR), blood lactate (BLa), and rating of perceived exertion (RPE) during the performance of 4 repeated sprint drills, each totaling a sprint distance of 600 m. The 4 drills used 15- or 40-m sprints with 1:4 or 1:6 exercise: rest ratios. The 15-m sprint drill with 1:4 exercise:rest ratio induced the greatest fatigue (final sprint time 15% greater than initial sprint time) and greatest physiological responses. The 40-m sprint drill using a 1:4 exercise:rest ratio produced similar BLa and HR responses to the 15-m drill (13-14 mmol.L(-1) and 89% HRmax, respectively) but significantly lower RPE (mean +/- SD: 17.1 +/- 0.4 vs. 18.8 +/- 0.4, p < 0.05) and fatigue rates (11.1 vs. 15.0%, p < 0.01). Both sprint distance and exercise:rest ratio independently influenced fatigue rate, with the 15-m sprint distance and the 1:4 exercise:rest ratio inducing significantly (p < 0.01) greater fatigue than the 40-m sprint distance and the 1:6 exercise:rest ratio. The magnitude of fatigue during the 40- x 15-m sprint drill using a 1:6 exercise:rest ratio was 7.5%, which is close to the fatigue rate previously reported during actual soccer play. The present study is the first to examine both variations in sprint distances and rest ratios simultaneously, and the findings may aid the design of repeated sprint training for soccer.

Thomas Little

Papers

Specificity of acceleration, maximum speed and agility in professional soccer players

Effects of differential stretching protocols during warm-ups on high-speed motor capacities in professional soccer players.

Measures of exercise intensity during soccer training drills with professional soccer players

Suitability of soccer training drills for endurance training

Effects of sprint duration and exercise: rest ratio on repeated sprint performance and physiological responses in professional soccer players.