The use of small-sided game formats as individualised training stimuli for football playing positions.

Blogpost Written by Dr Will Abbott

By now it is clear the competitive demands of football differ between playing positions. Central defenders have been shown to produce the lowest total and high-speed distances during competition, whilst central midfielders produce the highest total distances (Abbott et al., 2018; Bradley et al., 2009; O’Donoghue et al., 2005). Wide attacking and wide defending positions are characterised by high-speed activities, producing the highest high-speed distances, and the highest number of high-intensity accelerations (Abbott et al., 2018; Bradley et al., 2010, Ingebrigtsen et al., 2015). Central defenders are suggested to have the least physical demand associated, whilst the physical demands placed upon strikers are multifaceted (Abbott et al., 2018). As physical performance practitioners working with coaches to design training sessions, we often consider the aim of conditioning training to replicate, or overload, competitive demands to develop physical performance during competition (Dellal et al., 2012). With the aforementioned in mind, and considering the variation in competitive demands elicited upon playing positions, questions have been raised as to the efficacy of a one-size-fits-all approach to training. Instead, it has been suggested there should be a focus upon the specific individual requirements of an athlete to maximise training efficiency (Domene, 2013; Owen et al., 2016).

A particular personal interest of mine is increasing the specificity of our training load prescription to athletes. This is a topic that has been discussed extensively within our football club, by both coaching and performance staff. An academy’s approach to the prescription of technical, tactical, physical and psychological training is often shifted towards an individualised approach when compared to first team football. Rationale is that the academy’s aim is primarily focused upon producing individual players for the club’s first team, or to sell, and not necessarily to develop a successful team at academy level. Individual development plans have subsequently focused upon developing the individual within the team. Therefore, if our academy is to be successful in producing individual players for our first team, the training prescribed must be specific to the individual athlete in question.

Of particular focus amongst our staff were the use of training games, often termed small-sided games, as training modalities. Training games are a popular training modality in football, as they allow for technical, tactical, and physical aspects to be trained simultaneously (Abrantes et al., 2012; Owen et al., 2011). Specifically, we were interested in the use of different sized training games, and their specificity to individual playing positions. Often, the training game format is prescribed based upon the total number of players in the session (e.g. 16 outfield players – 8v8, 8 outfield players – 4v4), rather than being prescribed by the desired physical stimuli. Previous research suggests that manipulating game format can affect the physical demands placed upon athletes. For example, small-sided games (SSGs) elicit higher ratings of perceived exertion and heart rate responses, and lower work:rest ratios in comparison to medium-sided games (MSGs), and large-sided games (LSGs) (Castellano et al., 2013). The same is true for agility demands, and changes in speed (Davies et al., 2013; Guadino et al., 2014). Research also suggests that SSGs are unable to replicate the sprint demands of competition (Casamichana et al., 2012; Owen et al., 2014). Whilst LSGs demonstrate higher total distances, high-speed running, and number of accelerations when compared to their smaller equivalents (Brandes et al., 2012; Castellano et al., 2013).

A topic often overlooked is considering the peak demands of competition and training game formats. The peak demands of competition vital to consider, as they often occur during the most important periods of competition, when games are won or lost. Solely preparing athletes for the average demands of competition could leave them underprepared, and at a higher risk of injury, during the most demanding periods of play (Gabbett et al., 2016).

Within my current applied environment, we were interested in the specificity of different game formats as an individualised training stimulus for football playing positions, with specific reference to both the average and peak demands relative to competition. We consequently designed an investigation to examine this (Abbott et al., 2017). The desired outcome of which was to provide coaches with vital information regarding the game formats most specific in stimulating competitive demands of individual playing positions.

Competition and training data was collected for 46 U23 professional players over a competitive season. Players were divided into five playing positions (central defenders, wide defenders, central midfielders, wide attackers, and strikers), with positional physical data from 22 competitive matches, and 39 training game sessions recorded using 10-Hz GPS and 100-Hz accelerometer devices. GPS metrics analysed were distance, speed, and acceleration. Individual RPE data was collected following each match and training game session. Average and peak GPS metrics, and RPE were compared between game formats and competition for each playing position. For analysis purposes, training game formats were sub-divided into LSGs, MSGs, and SSGs. LSGs were characterised as 10v10, 9v9, 8v8, or 7v7 plus goalkeepers. MSGs were characterised as 6v6, 5v5, or 4v4 plus goalkeepers. SSGs were characterised as 3v3, 2v2, or 1v1 plus goalkeepers (Verheijen, 2014).

Figure 1 presents average and peak total distances produced by game format and playing position. Results show competition produced the lowest average total distances, followed by SSGs, MSGs, and LSGs. Central defenders produced significantly lower total distances than all other playing positions, with central midfielders producing significantly higher. For peak total distances, SSGs produced the lowest distances, followed by MSGs, LSGs, and competition. Whilst central midfielders produced highest peak total distances, this did not differ significantly from wide attackers, with central defenders producing the lowest peak distances. Wide defenders did not differ significantly from wide attackers or strikers.

Figure 2 presents average and peak very high-speed running and sprinting distances produced by game format and playing position. Results show SSGs produce the lowest very high-speed running and sprinting distances, followed by MSGs, competition, and LSGs. For peak very high-speed running and sprinting distances, SSGs produced the lowest distances followed by MSGs, LSGs, and competition. The highest peak very high-speed running and sprinting distances were observed in wide defenders and wide attackers, significantly higher than all other playing positions, followed by strikers, central midfielders, and central defenders.

Figure 3 presents average and peak moderate-intensity acceleration distances produced by game format and playing position. Results show SSGs produced highest average moderate-intensity acceleration distances, followed by MSGs, LSGs and competition. Central defenders produced significantly lower moderate-intensity acceleration distances than all other positions, with central midfielders producing significantly higher distances than all positions. No significant differences were identified between wide defenders, wide attackers and strikers. For peak moderate-intensity acceleration distances, SSGs produced the highest, followed by MSGs. There were no significant differences between LSGs and competition. For playing positions, central midfielders produced the highest peak moderate-intensity acceleration distances, with central defenders producing the lowest. No significant differences were identified between wide defenders, wide attackers, and strikers.

Figure 4 presents average and peak high-intensity acceleration distances produced by game format and playing position. Results show SSGs produced the lowest average high-intensity acceleration distances, whilst LSGs produce the highest. There were no significant differences between MSGs and competition. Central defenders and central midfielders produced the lowest high-intensity acceleration distances, whilst wide defenders and wide attackers produced the highest. For peak high-intensity acceleration distances, SSGs produced lowest, followed by MSGs, competition, and LSGs. Wide defenders and wide attackers produced highest peak high-intensity acceleration distances, whilst central defenders and central midfielders produced the lowest.

Figure 5 presents RPE (Borg CR10-scale) values produced by game format and playing position. Results show SSGs elicited the highest RPE followed by MSGs, competition, and LSGs. No significant differences were identified between playing positions.

In summary, results show total distances were highest in LSGs, and lowest in SSGs. Very high-speed running and sprinting distances increased with game format, with LSGs producing the highest. Average moderate-intensity acceleration distances were highest in SSGs, and decreased as game format increased. High-intensity acceleration distances were highest in LSGs, and decreased with game format. RPE was highest in SSGs, with lower ratings reported for MSGs, and the lowest for LSGs. These results suggest that each format elicits a unique physical load upon athletes, and that no single game format develops overall football fitness. That being said. it is possible to attribute specific training game formats to playing positions, dependent upon the predominant activities performed during competition. For example, SSGs for central midfielders, and LSGs for wide defenders and wide attackers.

Results also highlight the importance of analysing peak competitive demands. When comparing average total distances of training games to competition, LSGs and MSGs were significantly higher than competition. However, when comparing the peak total distances, all game formats were significantly lower than competition. This was also evident with very high-speed running and sprinting distances. Comparison of average very high-speed running and sprinting distances demonstrated no significant differences between LSGs and competition. However, when comparing peak very high-speed running and sprinting distances, all game formats were significantly lower than competition. Essentially, despite certain game formats replicating average demands of competition, the peak demands of competition were far from achieved.

Feedback of the investigation’s findings to the wider multidisciplinary team led to some valuable discussions. Results suggest that certain training game formats may act as more specific training modalities for individual playing positions. Specifically, SSGs more specific for central midfielders, and LSGs more specific for wide attackers. In theory this may be true, however often in practice this often proves infeasible. This is a result of the typical academy squad size being ~20 players, with on average 3-5 players in each playing position. Therefore, these results require a degree of pragmatism when applied to practice. A pragmatic recommendation is to incorporate a balance of training game formats over the course of a training week. This ensures each playing position receives a degree of specific training game exposure on a weekly basis. A danger of coaches using a single training game format (e.g. only SSGs) throughout the week, may be that they do not expose a certain playing position to their competitive demands (e.g. wide attackers and wide defenders).

References

• Abbott, W., Brickley, G., & Smeeton, N.J. (2018). Physical demands of playing position within English Premier League academy soccer. Journal of Human Sport & Exercise, 13(2), 1-11.
• Abbott, W., Brickley, G., & Smeeton, N.J. (2017). Positional differences in GPS outputs and perceived exertion during soccer training games and competition. The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 32(11), 3222-3231.
• Abrantes, C. I., Nunes, M. I, Macas, V. M, Leite, N. M., & Sampaio, J. E. (2012). Effects of the number of players and game type constraints on heart rate, rating of perceived exertion, and technical actions of small-sided soccer games. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 26(4), 976-981.
• Bradley, P. S., Di Mascio, M., Peart, D., Olsen, P., & Sheldon, B. (2010). High-intensity activity profiles of elite soccer players at different performance levels. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 24(9), 2343-2351.
• Bradley, P. S., Sheldon, W., Wooster, B., Olsen, P., Boanas, P., & Krustrup, P. (2009). High-intensity running in English FA Premier League soccer matches. Journal of Sports Sciences, 27(2), 159-168.
• Brandes, M., Heitman, A., & Muller, Lutz (2012). Physiological responses of different small-sided game formats in elite youth soccer players. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 26(5), 1353-1360.
• Casamichana, D., Castellano, J., & Castagna, C. (2012). Comparing the physical demands of friendly matches and small-sided games in semiprofessional soccer players. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 26(3), 837-843.
• Castellano, J., Casamichana, D., & Dellal, A. (2013). Influence of game format and number of players on heart rate responses and physical demands in small-sided soccer games. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 27(5), 1295-1303.
• Davies, M. J., Young, W., Farrow, D., & Bahnert, A. (2013). Comparison of agility demands of small-sided games in elite Australian football. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 8(2), 139-147.
• Dellal, A., Owen, A., Wong, D., Krustrup, P., van Exsel, M., & Mallo, J. (2012). Technical and physical demands of small vs. large sided games in relation to playing position in elite soccer. Journal of Human Movement Science, 31(4), 957-969.
• Domene, M. (2013). Evaluation of movement and physiological demands of full-back and center-back soccer players using global positioning systems. Journal of Human, Sports and Exercise, 8(4), 1015-1028.
• Gabbett, T. J. (2016). The training-injury prevention paradox: should athletes be training smarter and harder? British Journal of Sports Medicine, 50(5), 273-280.
• Guadino, P., Alberti, G., & Iaia, M. F. (2014). Estimated metabolic and mechanical demands during different small-sided games in elite soccer players. Human Movement Science, 36, 123-133.
• Ingebrigtsen, J., Dalen, T., Hjelde, G. H., Drust, B., & Wisloff, U. (2015). Acceleration and sprint profiles of a professional football team in match play. European Journal of Sport Science, 15(2), 101-110.
• O’Donoghue, P., Rudkin, S., Bloomfield, J., Powell, S., Cairns, G., Dunkerly, A., Davey, P., Probert, G., & Bowater, J. (2005). Repeated work activity in English FA Premier League soccer. International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, 5, 46-57.
• Owen, A. L., Dunlop, G., Rouissi, M., Haddad, M., Mendes, B., & Chamari, K. (2016). Analysis of positional training loads (ratings of perceived exertion) during various-sided games in European professional soccer players. International Journal of Sport Science & Coaching, 11(3), 374-381.
• Owen, A. L., Wong, D. P., McKenna, M., & Dellal, A. (2011). Heart rate responses and technical comparison between small and large sided games in elite professional soccer. Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 25(8), 2104-2110.
• Owen, A. L., Wong, D. P., Paul, D., & Dellal, D. (2014). Physical and technical comparisons between various-sided games within professional soccer. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 35(4), 286-292.
• Verheijen, R. (2014). The original guide to football periodization (Part 1). Amsterdam, Netherlands: The World Football Academy.