Next Article in Journal
Information Bottleneck Analysis by a Conditional Mutual Information Bound
Next Article in Special Issue
The “Hockey” Assist Makes the Difference—Validation of a Defensive Disruptiveness Model to Evaluate Passing Sequences in Elite Soccer
Previous Article in Journal
Chemical and Mechanical Aspect of Entropy-Exergy Relationship
Previous Article in Special Issue
Early Prediction of Physical Performance in Elite Soccer Matches—A Machine Learning Approach to Support Substitutions
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Entropy
Volume 23
Issue 8
10.3390/e23080973
entropy-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effects of Match Location, Quality of Opposition and Match Outcome on Match Running Performance in a Portuguese Professional Football Team

by
José E. Teixeira
1,2,3,*,
Miguel Leal
4,
Ricardo Ferraz
1,5,
Joana Ribeiro
4,
José M. Cachada
4,
Tiago M. Barbosa
1,3,
António M. Monteiro
1,3 and
Pedro Forte
1,3,4
1
Research Centre in Sports Sciences, Health and Human Development, 5001-801 Vila Real, Portugal
2
Department of Sports, Exercise and Health Sciences, University of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, 5001-801 Vila Real, Portugal
3
Departamento de Desporto e Educação Física, Instituto Politécnico de Bragança, 5300-253 Bragança, Portugal
4
Department of Sports, Douro Higher Institute of Educational Sciences, 4560-708 Penafiel, Portugal
5
Department of Sports Sciences, University of Beira Interior, 6201-001 Covilhã, Portugal
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Entropy 2021, 23(8), 973; https://doi.org/10.3390/e23080973
Submission received: 2 July 2021 / Revised: 18 July 2021 / Accepted: 27 July 2021 / Published: 29 July 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Data Analytics in Sports Sciences: Changing the Game)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The aim of this study was to analyze the effects of match location, quality of opposition and match outcome on match running performance according to playing position in a Portuguese professional football team. Twenty-three male professional football players were monitored from eighteen Portuguese Football League matches during the 2019–2020 season. Global positioning system technology (GPS) was used to collect time-motion data. The match running performance was obtained from five playing positions: central defenders (CD), fullbacks (FB), central midfielders (CM), wide midfielders (WM) and forwards (FW). Match running performance was analyzed within specific position and contextual factors using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for repeated measures, standardized (Cohen) differences and smallest worthwhile change. CM and WM players covered significantly greater total distance (F = 15.45, p = 0.000, η2 = 0.334) and average speed (F = 12.79, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.294). WM and FB players covered higher distances at high-speed running (F = 16.93, p = 0.000, η2 = 0.355) and sprinting (F = 13.49; p < 0.001, η2 = 0.305). WM players covered the highest number of accelerations (F = 4.69, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.132) and decelerations (F = 12.21, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.284). The match running performance was influenced by match location (d = 0.06–2.04; CI: −0.42–2.31; SWC = 0.01–1.10), quality of opposition (d = 0.13–2.14; CI: –0.02–2.60; SWC = 0.01–1.55) and match outcome (d = 0.01–2.49; CI: −0.01–2.31; SWC = 0.01–0.35). Contextual factors influenced the match running performance with differential effects between playing positions. This study provides the first report about the contextual influence on match running performance in a Portuguese professional football team. Future research should also integrate tactical and technical key indicators when analyzing the match-related contextual influence on match running performance.

1. Introduction

Football is an intermittent team sport characterized by high physiological demands [1]. Elite players were found to cover 9–14 km in total during an official football match [2,3]. The high-intensity activity (>19.8 km·h–1) represents 8–10% of the total distance completed, since most movement activities are carried out in low-intensity zones [4,5]. The distances covered at high intensities are a valid indicator to evaluate physical performance in professional football given its relationship with the training process [6,7]. High-speed running, sprints, tackles, impact accelerations and decelerations occur intermittently in a match-play, which require greater physiological and neuromuscular demands [8].
Researchers’ and practitioners’ interest in the physical performance has been growing over the last four decades at the professional football level [9,10]. Monitoring players’ work-rate profiles during training and competition has become more practicable with computer-aided time-motion approaches [5,6,7]. Additionally, using tracking systems to monitor match demands has become a hot topic of research, referring to work rate, activity profile or match running performance [5,9,11,12]. Several studies quantified the match running performance across national professional leagues, such as the English [13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21], Italian [3,22,23], Spanish [19,24,25,26], French [20,27,28], German [29,30,31,32], Brazilian [33,34], Norwegian [35,36], Danish [37] and Australian leagues [38,39]. The literature also focused on the European Champions League [40,41,42,43,44], UEFA Cup/Europe League [41,44] and the World Cup [45,46,47]. Current research has also demonstrated an influence of position on the players’ match demands [15,19,25,26,48], and further, the football game’s evolution has demonstrated a position-specific physical increase over time [11,49,50]. Generally, central midfielders covered more distance, and wide midfielders covered more distance at high-intensity zones [13,51]. The central defenders and wide defenders covered more distance at low-intensity zones [51]. Forwards sprint significantly less frequently than central defenders [21]. Central defenders performed significantly fewer explosive and leading sprints [13]. Accelerations contributed to 7–10% of the player workload for all playing positions during a match-play, while decelerations represented 5–7% [52].
Nevertheless, interpreting match running performance should consider the influence of contextual, environmental or situational factors [24,53,54,55]. Studies have pointed to a strong influence of contextual factors on the match running performances from top football national leagues and continental competitions [24,30,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64]. Hence, independent and interactive potential effects have been reported for match running performance according to match location, quality of opposition and match status in professional football [59,65]. Contextual factors have a potential influence on the relationship between match running and the overall performance dimension [55]. Thus, match running performance shall be adjusted according to the intended contextual factors underlying the match-play [24,53,55]. Indeed, elite players normally cover less high-intensity distances when winning [66]. Total distance covered by players was found to be higher when playing at home and against high-ranked teams [24,59]. Linking players’ behaviors and match outcomes in specific contexts has been identified as a crucial insight to develop specific game strategies or training designs [11].
To the best of our knowledge, no studies have analyzed the influence of contextual factors on match running performance in a professional Portuguese football competition. Therefore, the aim of this study was to analyze the effects of match location, quality of opposition and match outcome on match running performance according to playing position in a Portuguese professional football team. It was hypothesized that the contextual factors and specific playing positions influence the match running performance.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants and Match Sample

Twenty-three male professional football players (age: 32.02 ± 1.19 years; height: 1.82 ± 0.01 m; weight: 74.74 ± 0.53 kg) participated in eighteen Portuguese Second League (Leadman LigaPro®,Lisbon, Portugal) matches (8 home and 10 away) during the 2019–2020 season. The sampled players were characterized to one of five playing positions (goalkeeper was excluded): central defenders (CD), fullbacks (FB), central midfielders (CM), wide midfielders (WM) and forwards (FW). The numbers of subjects in the different subgroups were: CD (n = 6), FB (n = 4), CM (n = 5), WM (n = 5) and FW (n = 3). The playing positions were organized into ten dyads: CD vs. FB, CD vs. WM, CD vs. CM, CD vs. FW, FB vs. WM, FB vs. CM, FB vs. FW, CM vs. WM, CM vs. FW and WM vs. FW. The match data correspond to the observations of the seven outfield players for each match in the same team (n = 128). The analysis has only considered the players who were part of the starting line-up and performed the entire match duration. The substituted players and non-starting players were not analyzed. The number of observations per position role was: CD (n = 36), FB (n = 31), CM (n = 33), WM (n = 19) and FW (n = 9). The match data showed 3 wins, 9 draws and 5 loses, with a total of 13 goals scored and 15 goals conceded by the sampled team. The matches (2 × 45′) were performed in official stadiums (FIFA standard, natural grass, ~100 × 70 m), between 10:00 AM and 08:00 PM, and the mean environment temperature was 14.9 ± 5.3 °C.
All participants were informed about the aim and risks in the investigation. The study includes only the players that have signed the informed consent, and was conducted according the ethical standards of the Declaration of Helsinki. The experimental approach was approved and followed by the Technical and Scientific Board of the Douro Higher Institute of Educational Sciences.

2.2. Data Collection and Procedures

The seven main players were monitored in each match using a portable GPS throughout the whole match duration (STATSports Apex®, Newry, Northern Ireland). The GPS device provides raw position velocity and distance at 10 Hz sampling frequencies, including accelerometer (100 Hz), magnetometer (10 Hz) and gyroscope (100 Hz). Each player wore the micro-technology inside a mini-pock of a custom-made vest supplied by the manufacturer, which was placed on the upper back between both scapulae. All devices were activated 30 min before the match data collection to allow an acceptable clear reception of the satellite signal. Respecting the optimal signal to the measurement of human movement, the match data considered eight available satellite signals as the minimum for the observations [67]. The validity and reliability of the global navigation satellite systems (GNSS), such as the GPS tracking, have been well-established in the literature [67,68,69]. The current variables and thresholds have a small error of around 1–2% reported for the 10 Hz STATSports Apex® devices [68].

2.3. Contextual Factors

Contextual factors were codified based on three independent variables: match location, quality of opposition and match outcome. These contextual dimensions have been extensively documented in the literature [54,65]. Match location was split into “home” and “away”, based on when the team under analysis was playing at home or away. Quality of opposition was classified from “high-ranking” (i.e., from 1st to 5th position in the league ranking), “medium-ranking” (i.e., from 6th to 12th position in the league ranking) and “low-ranking” (i.e., from 13th to 18th position in the league ranking). Quality of opposition was classified according to the final standing of the 2019–2020 season. Match outcome was analyzed according to “lose”, “draw” or “win” at the end of the match-play.

2.4. Physical Load Measures

The match running performances were obtained with the following time-motion data using physical load measures: total distance (TD) covered (m), average speed (AvS) expressed in distance covered per minute (m·min−1), high-speed running (HSR) distance (m), number of sprints (SPR), number of accelerations (ACC) and number of decelerations (DEC). The GPS software only provided information about the locomotor categories above 19.8 km·h−1: HSR (19.8–25.1 km·h−1) and SPR (>25.1 km·h−1). Both acceleration variables (ACC and DEC) considered the movements made in the maximum intensity zone (3 m·s−2): ACC (>3 m·s−2) and ACC (<3 m·s−2). The high-intensity activity thresholds were adapted from previous studies [6,7].

2.5. Statistical Analysis

For descriptive statistics, the Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Levene’s tests were used to test the normality and homogeneity, where a normal distribution was observed. Differences between playing positions, contextual factors and match running performance were tested with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for repeated measures. When a significant difference occurred, Bonferroni post-hoc tests were used to identify localized effects. Dunnett’s T3 post-hoc tests were applied if variances were not homogeneous. Bonferroni post hoc was performed to evaluate TD, rHSR, SPR and AvS. The Dunnett’s T3 post-hoc was executed for ACC and DEC.
Standardized effect sizes (ES) were calculated by Cohen’s d, and the thresholds were classified as: 0.2, trivial; 0.6, small; 1.2, large; >2.0, very large [70,71]. Smallest worthwhile change (SWC) was calculated as 0.2 multiplied by standard deviation (SD). Additionally, trivial area was calculated from the SWC determined as 0.2 times the between-playing positions [72].
Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Data are presented as the mean ± SD. Mean differences (Δ) are presented in absolute values. All statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (Version 27.0., IBM Corp, Armonk, NY, USA). ES calculations were performed with G*Power (Version 3.1.5.1 Institut für Experimentelle Psychologie, Düsseldorf, Germany). Data visualization was produced using GraphPad Prism (GraphPad Software, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Effects of Contextual Factors on Match Running Performance

The descriptive statistics of match running performance according to competitive stage, match location quality of opposition and match outcome are presented in Table 1.
Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4 present the influence of contextual factors on match running performance according to playing positions. Standardized (Cohen) differences, 95% CI and SWC for each contextual factor are presented in Figure 1. Match running performance was influenced with trivial to very large effects by match location (d = 0.06–2.04; CI: −0.42–2.31; SWC = 0.01–1.10), quality of opposition (d = 0.13–2.14; CI: −0.02–2.60; SWC = 0.01–1.55) and match outcome (d = 0.01–2.49; CI: −0.01–2.31; SWC = 0.01–0.35). Quality of opposition’s influence had a very large effect on TD for WM vs. FW (d = 2.14, CI: 1.88–2.40; SWC = 0.30). Match outcome had a very large effect on rHSR for CD vs. FB (d = 2.12, CI: 1.97–2.27; SWC = 0.17) and CD vs. WM (d = 2.49, CI: 2.38–2.60; SWC = 0.13). CD vs. WM also showed a very large result of the quality of the opposition’s influence for DEC (d = 2.14, CI: 1.97–2.31; SWC = 0.19).

3.2. Effects of Playing Position on Match Running Performance

The descriptive statistics of match running performance of each playing position were presented in Table 5. The match running performance was influenced by playing position on all physical load measures analyzed: TD (F = 15.45, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.334), AvS (F = 12.79, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.294), rHSR (F = 16.93, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.355), SPR (F = 13.49, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.305), ACC (F = 4.69, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.132) and DEC (F = 12.21, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.284).
Specifically, the pairwise comparisons for the playing position factor revealed (see Figure 2) that CM and WM players covered significantly greater TD than other playing positions: CM vs. CD (Δ = 1119.09 m, p < 0.001, d = 1.54), CM vs. FB (Δ = 714.90 m, p < 0.001, d = 1.03), CM vs. FW (Δ = 1266.87 m, p < 0.001, d = 1.74), and WM vs. CD (Δ = 887.37 m, p < 0.001, d = 1.41), WM vs. FB (Δ = 473.17 m, p < 0.001, d = 0.80) and WM vs. FW (Δ = 551.97 m, p < 0.001, d = 1.64).
Regarding the distance covered per minute, CM players covered significantly more distance than any other playing position except WM players: CD (Δ = 0.11 m · min−1, p = 0.000, d = 11.80), FB (Δ = 0.01 m·min−1, p < 0.001, d = 12.23) and FW (Δ = 0.01 m · min−1, p = 0.000, d = 12.67). WM players covered significantly more rHSR than all playing positions (Δ = 351.14 m, p < 0.001, d = 1.38–2.09), except FB players. FB players covered significantly greater rHSR than CD (Δ = 346.88 m, p = 0.001, d = 1.60), CM (Δ = 184.08 m, p = 0.003, d = 0.89) and FW (Δ = 242.97 m, p = 0.016, d = 1.28).
WM players presented significantly higher SPR than all playing position except FB players: CD (Δ = 23.39, p < 0.001, d = 2.05), CM (Δ = 16.85, p = 0.000, d = 1.25) and FW (Δ = 18.14, p = 0.003, d = 1.45). The SPR distance covered by FB players was significantly greater than CD (Δ = 14.06, p < 0.05, d = 1.33). FW players showed significantly lower SPR values compared to CM (Δ = 1.28, p < 0.05, d = 0.09).
WM players covered significantly higher ACC than CM players (Δ = 19.23, p < 0.001, d = 0.91) and CD players (Δ = 18.37, p = 0.002, d = 0.93). WM players covered significantly greater DEC than other playing positions, except CM players: CD (Δ = 34.25, p < 0.001, d = 1.88), FB (Δ = 20.36, p < 0.05, d = 1.14) and FW (Δ = 25.53, p < 0.05, d = 1.48). FB players presented significantly higher than CD players (Δ = 13.90, p < 0.05, d = 0.94).

4. Discussion

The aim of this study was to analyze the effects of match location, quality of opposition and match outcome on match running performance according to playing position in a Portuguese professional football team. In general, our findings described significant differences between playing positions considering the match running performance. As hypothesized, the findings confirmed the influence of match location, quality of opposition and match outcome on match running performance, with some differences according to playing position.

4.1. Contextual Factors and Their Influence on Match Running Performance

The present study confirmed the influence of match location (trivial to large effects), quality of opposition (trivial to very large effects) and match outcome (trivial to very large effects) on match running performance. Additionally, our findings reported a match-related contextual influence with a specific position dependence. Very large effects were found for match outcome and quality of opposition in TD, rHSR and DEC, with positional differences (i.e., WM vs. FW, CD vs. FB and CD vs. WM). Previous studies have also verified these positional differences on the match running performance depending on the contextual factors [11,24,53,54,55]. High-intensity activity differences were highly influenced, with forwards more active when winning and vice versa for defenders [53]. This specific position dependence was also reported by Aquino et al. [73], who reported a higher relative contribution to the variance in high-intensity activities in Brazilian professional football players. Bush et al. [61] described a higher match-to-match variability for central defenders and wide midfielders in the HSR and SPR demands. This positional effect was also reported in different odds of winning according to playing position [70]. In this sense, Tucker et al. [63] mentioned an advantage to home-winning and home-goal percentage. Relating to effects of match location, previous studies have observed that the teams win most when playing at home [59]. TD seems to be the most affected, and high-intensity distances were covered when winning [66]. García-Unanue et al. [60] also reported an impact of match location on physical performance, whereby playing away showed the highest distance covered in the second half. This likely happens because players show higher levels of synchronization as the match develops [74]. In addition, the player’s usually covered less high-intensity activity when winning than when losing or drawing [24]. Indeed, it seems that more organized teams showed a greater relational capacity between their players, who therefore do not need to run as much [75,76]. Another reason could be outlined by fatigue effects, causing different pacing strategies and team coordination [77,78,79]. Opponent level was reported in previous investigations as an important contextual factor [4,29,59]. Higher ranked teams covered more distance at walking and jogging speeds [59]. Additionally, higher ranked teams covered less TD and less HSR compared to lower-ranked teams, among which higher total distance was performed at home and against high-ranked teams [24,59]. Our findings suggested that quality of opposition and match outcome have a greater influence than match location. Additionally, the contextual factors and their changes seem to differ between playing positions. These differences in the effects of contextual factors can be considered to control the weekly training load and adequately taper the strategy in preparation for the next match-play [6,7].

4.2. Match Running Performance

Positional differences on match running performance were reported in this study. CM and WM players covered significantly greater TD than other playing positions (strong effect). Previous studies also reported that midfielders covered longer distances in comparison to defenders and forwards [4,14,15,19,20,23,25,26,40,44]. The midfielder positions covered a 3% longer distance than forwards, and 7% longer than that achieved by the defenders [44]. In contrast, other studies only reported differences in the CD and/or FW players [4,19,80,81]. The contrasting findings may be explained by the differences in the match running performance according to competition standards [20]. Hence, it is important to compare the performed match running in a Portuguese second division with other professional football leagues. TD observed in our study (11,539.09 m) differed from other national leagues, such as the English Premier League (10,451–10,746 m) [15,19], Italian ‘Serie A’ (8943.0–10,330 m) [3,22], English Championship League (11,102 m) [17], Spanish ‘La Liga’ (5667–11,393 m) [24,25,26], German ‘Bundesliga’ (11,621 m) [29], French ‘Ligue 1’ (10,746–12,029 m) [20,27], Norwegian League (11,230 m) [35], Danish ‘Superliga’ (10,776 m) [37], Australian ‘A League’ (10,100–10,274 m) [38,39] and Brazilian ‘Serie A’ (10,012 m) and Brazilian lower divisions (8518–9375 m) [80,82]. Indeed, it appears evident that there is a trend to cover longer distances in the lower divisions. It is possible that higher levels of collective synchronization allow a greater individual and inter-individual capacity to explore space and interpret match information [74].
Concerning the distance covered per minute, CM and WM covered significantly greater AvS than other playing positions (very large effect). When compared to the distance covered across different playing positions, the literature reported a similar frequency in the distance covered at lower intensities [38]. Therefore, examining the high-intensity activity provides a valid insight into physical performance with their strong training status [9,10]. Our findings demonstrate that WM players covered significantly more rHSR than all playing positions, except FB players (moderate to large effect). FB players covered significantly greater rHSR than CD, CM and FW players (moderate to large effect). Our findings are consistent with other reports [14]. Previous studies also achieved lower HSR distances covered by CD players [36,83]. Additionally, one study also confirmed the greatest HSR distances for WM players, however the CM players presented higher jogging and running distances (7.2–19.7 km · h−1) [6]. In our match data, the SPR values showed significant differences between FB vs. CD (moderate effect) and FW vs. CM (small effect). The FW players sprinted less than the CM players. In contrast, other studies showed greater SPR distances for FW and FB than CM and CB players [3,4,22]. Dellal et al. [20] reported a greater SPR distance for FW compared to CD and FB. Di Salvo et al. [41] also reported that CD players sprinted less, however, the authors achieved the greatest SPR distance for WM players. Here, our findings demonstrate that match performance is crucial to explain the specific demands placed on each playing position. Moreover, there are other important factors to consider in the analysis of high-intensity movements which may have influenced our findings. First of all, there is a documented match-to-match variation in the high-intensity activity [84,85]. The literature reports differences in the performed match running through the two halves or period bouts [18,19,27,35,80]. Understanding positional differences on match running performance can help coaches to better plan and periodize on the basis of these match-to-match variations.
Regarding the performed acceleration profiles, our study reported a higher ACC in the WM players than CD and CM (small effect). Additionally, WM players presented higher DEC than other playing positions (moderate to large effect). Our results were not consistent with the literature, which documents positional differences in the acceleration profiles during competitive matches [14,26,37]. The players in lateral positions accelerated more than central positions [35]. Our findings had substantially less ACC and DEC than previously reported findings in higher-ranked leagues [26,35,37,39]. On the other hand, the average number of maximal accelerations per match and peak acceleration achieved during the match-play does not seem to be influenced by positional roles [14]. However, these studies generally use different acceleration thresholds that could bias the ACC and DEC outputs upon the time-dependent and transient reductions [13]. Ideally, future studies should also consider the ACC and DEC through each half of the match. Normally, the players performed lower numbers of ACC and DEC in the second half than the first half [14,18,35,37].

4.3. Limitations and Future Perspectives

Our study has some limitations, which means that the results should be interpreted with caution: (i) match data did not consider the different period bouts and halves of the match, as in other studies [13,14,15,17,18,20,48], and (ii) technical factors (i.e., running with or without the ball) [56,86,87], tactical key indicators (i.e., possession strategies) [65,83,88] and collective behavior must be considered for a more ecological analysis [9,10,74,75,76,77,78,79]. (iii) The different methodological approaches used in the literature should be considered when interpreting our findings [6,7], (iv) cumulative effects of a pre-match training and players’ cognitive status prior to match-play were not controlled in this research [89,90,91] and (v) our match data reflect only one team and hence cannot be extended to all Portuguese professional teams. Hence, more analyses are required for this purpose, with a wider follow-up. Future research should also consider the relationship of accumulated training load, such as congested fixture, players’ starting status and competitive level [6,92]. Match running performance analysis should also include the game model, pacing strategies and collective tactical behavior [9,55,77,78,79].

5. Conclusions

This study confirmed that the match running performance was influenced by playing positions and match-related contextual factors. Additionally, this study provides the first report about the contextual influence on match running performance in a Portuguese professional football team. There was an influence of match location, quality of opposition and match outcome. Our match data suggest that positional differences and contextual factors are important factors to be considered by coaches, sport scientists and performance analysts. Indeed, match-related contextual factors plays an important role in team strategies and individual pacing management due to their influence on match running performance.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.E.T., R.F. and P.F.; Data curation, J.E.T., J.R., J.M.C. and P.F.; Formal analysis, P.F., M.L. and R.F.; Funding acquisition, J.E.T., J.R. and P.F.; Investigation, J.E.T.; Methodology, J.M.C., T.M.B. and A.M.M.; Resources, P.F. and A.M.M.; Software, J.E.T., J.R. and M.L.; Supervision, A.M.M. and P.F.; Validation, T.M.B. and A.M.M.; Writing—original draft, J.E.T., J.M.C. and M.L.; Writing—review and editing, P.F., R.F., T.M.B. and A.M.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by the Douro Higher Institute of Educational Sciences and the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology, I.P. (project UIDB04045/2021).

Data Availability Statement

Data is available upon request to the contact author.

Acknowledgments

The authors express thanks to all coaches and players for their cooperation during all collection procedures.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Iaia, F.M.; Ermanno, R.; Bangsbo, J. High-Intensity Training in Football. Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 2009, 4, 291–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Bangsbo, J.; Mohr, M.; Krustrup, P. Physical and Metabolic Demands of Training and Match-Play in the Elite Football Player. J. Sports Sci. 2006, 24, 665–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Mohr, M.; Krustrup, P.; Bangsbo, J. Match Performance of High-Standard Soccer Players with Special Reference to Development of Fatigue. J. Sports Sci. 2003, 21, 519–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Rampinini, E.; Coutts, A.J.; Castagna, C.; Sassi, R.; Impellizzeri, F.M. Variation in Top Level Soccer Match Performance. Int. J. Sports Med. 2007, 28, 1018–1024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Carling, C.; Bloomfield, J.; Nelsen, L.; Reilly, T. The Role of Motion Analysis in Elite Soccer: Contemporary Performance Measurement Techniques and Work Rate Data. Sports Med. 2008, 38, 839–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Teixeira, J.E.; Forte, P.; Ferraz, R.; Leal, M.; Ribeiro, J.; Silva, A.J.; Barbosa, T.M.; Monteiro, A.M. Monitoring Accumulated Training and Match Load in Football: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 3906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Miguel, M.; Oliveira, R.; Loureiro, N.; García-Rubio, J.; Ibáñez, S.J. Load Measures in Training/Match Monitoring in Soccer: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 2721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Harper, D.J.; Carling, C.; Kiely, J. High-Intensity Acceleration and Deceleration Demands in Elite Team Sports Competitive Match Play: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies. Sports Med. 2019, 49, 1923–1947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Bradley, P.S.; Ade, J.D. Are Current Physical Match Performance Metrics in Elite Soccer Fit for Purpose or Is the Adoption of an Integrated Approach Needed? Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 2018, 13, 656–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Carling, C. Interpreting Physical Performance in Professional Soccer Match-Play: Should We Be More Pragmatic in Our Approach? Sports Med. 2013, 43, 655–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Sarmento, H.; Clemente, F.M.; Araújo, D.; Davids, K.; McRobert, A.; Figueiredo, A. What Performance Analysts Need to Know about Research Trends in Association Football (2012–2016): A Systematic Review. Sports Med. 2018, 48, 799–836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Vieira, L.H.P.; Carling, C.; Barbieri, F.A.; Aquino, R.; Santiago, P.R.P. Match Running Performance in Young Soccer Players: A Systematic Review. Sports Med. 2019, 49, 289–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Akenhead, R.; Hayes, P.R.; Thompson, K.G.; French, D. Diminutions of Acceleration and Deceleration Output during Professional Football Match Play. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2013, 16, 556–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Bradley, P.S.; Di Mascio, M.; Peart, D.; Olsen, P.; Sheldon, B. High-Intensity Activity Profiles of Elite Soccer Players at Different Performance Levels. J Strength Cond. Res. 2010, 24, 2343–2351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Bradley, P.S.; Sheldon, W.; Wooster, B.; Olsen, P.; Boanas, P.; Krustrup, P. High-Intensity Running in English FA Premier League Soccer Matches. J. Sports Sci. 2009, 27, 159–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Di Salvo, V.; Gregson, W.; Atkinson, G.; Tordoff, P.; Drust, B. Analysis of High Intensity Activity in Premier League Soccer. Int. J. Sports Med. 2009, 30, 205–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Di Salvo, V.; Pigozzi, F.; González-Haro, C.; Laughlin, M.S.; De Witt, J.K. Match Performance Comparison in Top English Soccer Leagues. Int. J. Sports Med. 2013, 34, 526–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Bradley, P.S.; Noakes, T.D. Match Running Performance Fluctuations in Elite Soccer: Indicative of Fatigue, Pacing or Situational Influences? J. Sports Sci. 2013, 31, 1627–1638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Di Salvo, V.; Baron, R.; Tschan, H.; Calderon Montero, F.J.; Bachl, N.; Pigozzi, F. Performance Characteristics According to Playing Position in Elite Soccer. Int. J. Sports Med. 2007, 28, 222–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Dellal, A.; Chamari, K.; Wong, D.P.; Ahmaidi, S.; Keller, D.; Barros, R.; Bisciotti, G.N.; Carling, C. Comparison of Physical and Technical Performance in European Soccer Match-Play: FA Premier League and La Liga. Eur. J. Sport Sci. 2011, 11, 51–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Malone, J.J.; Di Michele, R.; Morgans, R.; Burgess, D.; Morton, J.P.; Drust, B. Seasonal Training-Load Quantification in Elite English Premier League Soccer Players. Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 2015, 10, 489–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Vigne, G.; Gaudino, C.; Rogowski, I.; Alloatti, G.; Hautier, C. Activity Profile in Elite Italian Soccer Team. Int. J. Sports Med. 2010, 31, 304–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Vigne, G.; Dellal, A.; Gaudino, C.; Chamari, K.; Rogowski, I.; Alloatti, G.; Wong, P.D.; Owen, A.; Hautier, C. Physical Outcome in a Successful Italian Serie A Soccer Team over Three Consecutive Seasons. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2013, 27, 1400–1406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Castellano, J.; Blanco-Villaseñor, A.; Alvarez, D. Contextual Variables and Time-Motion Analysis in Soccer. Int. J. Sports Med. 2011, 32, 415–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Lago-Peñas, C.; Rey, E.; Lago-Ballesteros, J.; Casais, L.; Domínguez, E. Analysis of Work-Rate in Soccer According to Playing Positions. Int. J. Perform. Anal. Sport 2009, 9, 218–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mallo, J.; Mena, E.; Nevado, F.; Paredes, V. Physical Demands of Top-Class Soccer Friendly Matches in Relation to a Playing Position Using Global Positioning System Technology. J. Hum. Kinet. 2015, 47, 179–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Carling, C.; Dupont, G. Are Declines in Physical Performance Associated with a Reduction in Skill-Related Performance during Professional Soccer Match-Play? J. Sports Sci. 2011, 29, 63–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Carling, C. Analysis of Physical Activity Profiles When Running with the Ball in a Professional Soccer Team. J. Sports Sci. 2010, 28, 319–326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Hoppe, M.W.; Slomka, M.; Baumgart, C.; Weber, H.; Freiwald, J. Match Running Performance and Success across a Season in German Bundesliga Soccer Teams. Int. J. Sports Med. 2015, 36, 563–566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Andrzejewski, M.; Konefał, M.; Chmura, P.; Kowalczuk, E.; Chmura, J. Match Outcome and Distances Covered at Various Speeds in Match Play by Elite German Soccer Players. Int. J. Perform. Anal. Sport 2016, 16, 817–828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Chmura, P.; Liu, H.; Andrzejewski, M.; Chmura, J.; Kowalczuk, E.; Rokita, A.; Konefał, M. Is There Meaningful Influence from Situational and Environmental Factors on the Physical and Technical Activity of Elite Football Players? Evidence from the Data of 5 Consecutive Seasons of the German Bundesliga. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0247771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Chmura, P.; Konefał, M.; Chmura, J.; Kowalczuk, E.; Zając, T.; Rokita, A.; Andrzejewski, M. Match Outcome and Running Performance in Different Intensity Ranges among Elite Soccer Players. Biol. Sport 2018, 35, 197–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Aquino, R.; Munhoz Martins, G.H.; Palucci Vieira, L.H.; Menezes, R.P. Influence of Match Location, Quality of Opponents, and Match Status on Movement Patterns in Brazilian Professional Football Players. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2017, 31, 2155–2161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Vieira, L.H.P.; Aquino, R.; Lago-Peñas, C.; Munhoz Martins, G.H.; Puggina, E.F.; Barbieri, F.A. Running Performance in Brazilian Professional Football Players during a Congested Match Schedule. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2018, 32, 313–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Ingebrigtsen, J.; Dalen, T.; Hjelde, G.H.; Drust, B.; Wisløff, U. Acceleration and Sprint Profiles of a Professional Elite Football Team in Match Play. Eur. J. Sport Sci. 2015, 15, 101–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Sæterbakken, A.; Haug, V.; Fransson, D.; Grendstad, H.N.; Gundersen, H.S.; Moe, V.F.; Ylvisaker, E.; Shaw, M.; Riiser, A.; Andersen, V. Match Running Performance on Three Different Competitive Standards in Norwegian Soccer. Sports Med. Int. Open 2019, 3, E82–E88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Vigh-Larsen, J.F.; Dalgas, U.; Andersen, T.B. Position-Specific Acceleration and Deceleration Profiles in Elite Youth and Senior Soccer Players. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2018, 32, 1114–1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Burgess, D.J.; Naughton, G.; Norton, K.I. Profile of Movement Demands of National Football Players in Australia. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2006, 9, 334–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Varley, M.C.; Gabbett, T.; Aughey, R.J. Activity Profiles of Professional Soccer, Rugby League and Australian Football Match Play. J. Sports Sci. 2014, 32, 1858–1866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Smpokos, E.; Mourikis, C.; Linardakis, M. Seasonal Physical Performance of a Professional Team’s Football Players in a National League and European Matches. J. Hum. Sport Exerc. 2018, 13, 720–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Di Salvo, V.; Baron, R.; González-Haro, C.; Gormasz, C.; Pigozzi, F.; Bachl, N. Sprinting Analysis of Elite Soccer Players during European Champions League and UEFA Cup Matches. J. Sports Sci. 2010, 28, 1489–1494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Miñano-Espin, J.; Casáis, L.; Lago-Peñas, C.; Gómez-Ruano, M.Á. High Speed Running and Sprinting Profiles of Elite Soccer Players. J. Hum. Kinet. 2017, 58, 169–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Bradley, P.S.; Dellal, A.; Mohr, M.; Castellano, J.; Wilkie, A. Gender Differences in Match Performance Characteristics of Soccer Players Competing in the UEFA Champions League. Hum. Mov. Sci. 2014, 33, 159–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Andrzejewski, M.; Chmura, J.; Pluta, B.; Strzelczyk, R.; Kasprzak, A. Analysis of Sprinting Activities of Professional Soccer Players. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2013, 27, 2134–2140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Clemente, F.M.; Couceiro, M.S.; Martins, F.M.L.; Ivanova, M.O.; Mendes, R. Activity Profiles of Soccer Players during the 2010 World Cup. J. Hum. Kinet. 2013, 38, 201–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Soroka, A.; Lago-Peñas, C. The Effect of a Succession of Matches on the Physical Performance of Elite Football Players during the World Cup Brazil 2014. Int. J. Perform. Anal. Sport 2016, 16, 434–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Chmura, P.; Andrzejewski, M.; Konefał, M.; Mroczek, D.; Rokita, A.; Chmura, J. Analysis of Motor Activities of Professional Soccer Players during the 2014 World Cup in Brazil. J. Hum. Kinet. 2017, 56, 187–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Goncalves, B.; Coutinho, D.; Travassos, B.; Folgado, H.; Caixinha, P.; Sampaio, J. Speed Synchronization, Physical Workload and Match-to-Match Performance Variation of Elite Football Players. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0200019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Barnes, C.; Archer, D.T.; Hogg, B.; Bush, M.; Bradley, P.S. The Evolution of Physical and Technical Performance Parameters in the English Premier League. Int. J. Sports Med. 2014, 35, 1095–1100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Bradley, P.S.; Archer, D.T.; Hogg, B.; Schuth, G.; Bush, M.; Carling, C.; Barnes, C. Tier-Specific Evolution of Match Performance Characteristics in the English Premier League: It’s Getting Tougher at the Top. J. Sports Sci. 2016, 34, 980–987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Oliveira, R.; Brito, J.P.; Martins, A.; Mendes, B.; Marinho, D.A.; Ferraz, R.; Marques, M.C. In-Season Internal and External Training Load Quantification of an Elite European Soccer Team. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0209393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Dalen, T.; Jørgen, I.; Gertjan, E.; Geir Havard, H.; Ulrik, W. Player Load, Acceleration, and Deceleration during Forty-Five Competitive Matches of Elite Soccer. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2016, 30, 351–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Trewin, J.; Meylan, C.; Varley, M.C.; Cronin, J. The Influence of Situational and Environmental Factors on Match-Running in Soccer: A Systematic Review. Sci. Med. Footb. 2017, 1, 183–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Lago-Peñas, C. The Role of Situational Variables in Analysing Physical Performance in Soccer. J. Hum. Kinet. 2012, 35, 89–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Paul, D.J.; Bradley, P.S.; Nassis, G.P. Factors Affecting Match Running Performance of Elite Soccer Players: Shedding Some Light on the Complexity. Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 2015, 10, 516–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  56. Taylor, J.B.; Mellalieu, S.D.; James, N.; Shearer, D.A. The Influence of Match Location, Quality of Opposition, and Match Status on Technical Performance in Professional Association Football. J. Sports Sci. 2008, 26, 885–895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Taylor, B.J.; Mellalieu, D.S.; James, N.; Barter, P. Situation Variable Effects and Tactical Performance in Professional Association Football. Int. J. Perform. Anal. Sport 2010, 10, 255–269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Redwood-Brown, A.J.; O’Donoghue, P.G.; Nevill, A.M.; Saward, C.; Dyer, N.; Sunderland, C. Effects of Situational Variables on the Physical Activity Profiles of Elite Soccer Players in Different Score Line States. Scand. J. Med. Sci. Sports 2018, 28, 2515–2526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Lago, C.; Casais, L.; Dominguez, E.; Sampaio, J. The Effects of Situational Variables on Distance Covered at Various Speeds in Elite Soccer. Eur. J. Sport Sci. 2010, 10, 103–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. García-Unanue, J.; Pérez-Gómez, J.; Giménez, J.-V.; Felipe, J.L.; Gómez-Pomares, S.; Gallardo, L.; Sánchez-Sánchez, J. Influence of Contextual Variables and the Pressure to Keep Category on Physical Match Performance in Soccer Players. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0204256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Bush, M.D.; Archer, D.T.; Hogg, R.; Bradley, P.S. Factors Influencing Physical and Technical Variability in the English Premier League. Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 2015, 10, 865–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Konefał, M.; Chmura, P.; Tessitore, A.; Melcer, T.; Kowalczuk, E.; Chmura, J.; Andrzejewski, M. The Impact of Match Location and Players’ Physical and Technical Activities on Winning in the German Bundesliga. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 1748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Tucker, W.; Mellalieu, S.; James, N.; Taylor, J. Game Location Effects in Professional Soccer: A Case Study. Int. J. Perform. Anal. Sport 2005, 5, 23–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Gonçalves, L.G.; Clemente, F.; Palucci Vieira, L.; Puggina, E.; Bedo, B.; Moura, F.; Mesquita, F.; Santiago, P.; Almeida, R.; Aquino, R. Effects of Match Location, Quality of Opposition, Match Outcome and Playing Position on Load Parameters and Players’ Prominence during Official Matches in Professional Soccer Players. Hum. Mov. 2021, 22, 35–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Lago, C. The Influence of Match Location, Quality of Opposition, and Match Status on Possession Strategies in Professional Association Football. J. Sports Sci. 2009, 27, 1463–1469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  66. Lago-Peñas, C.; Lago-Ballesteros, J. Game Location and Team Quality Effects on Performance Profiles in Professional Soccer. J. Sports Sci. Med. 2011, 10, 465–471. [Google Scholar]
  67. Jennings, D.; Cormack, S.; Coutts, A.J.; Boyd, L.J.; Aughey, R.J. Variability of GPS Units for Measuring Distance in Team Sport Movements. Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 2010, 5, 565–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  68. Beato, M.; Coratella, G.; Stiff, A.; Iacono, A.D. The Validity and Between-Unit Variability of GNSS Units (STATSports Apex 10 and 18 Hz) for Measuring Distance and Peak Speed in Team Sports. Front. Physiol. 2018, 9, 1288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Portas, M.D.; Harley, J.A.; Barnes, C.A.; Rush, C.J. The Validity and Reliability of 1-Hz and 5-Hz Global Positioning Systems for Linear, Multidirectional, and Soccer-Specific Activities. Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 2010, 5, 448–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Barbosa, T.M.; Ramos, R.; Silva, A.J.; Marinho, D.A. Assessment of Passive Drag in Swimming by Numerical Simulation and Analytical Procedure. J. Sports Sci. 2018, 36, 492–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Hopkins, W.G.; Marshall, S.W.; Batterham, A.M.; Hanin, J. Progressive Statistics for Studies in Sports Medicine and Exercise Science. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2009, 41, 3–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Batterham, A.M.; Hopkins, W.G. Making Meaningful Inferences about Magnitudes. Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 2006, 1, 50–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Aquino, R.; Carling, C.; Palucci Vieira, L.H.; Martins, G.; Jabor, G.; Machado, J.; Santiago, P.; Garganta, J.; Puggina, E. Influence of Situational Variables, Team Formation, and Playing Position on Match Running Performance and Social Network Analysis in Brazilian Professional Soccer Players. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2020, 34, 808–817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Folgado, H.; Gonçalves, B.; Sampaio, J. Positional Synchronization Affects Physical and Physiological Responses to Preseason in Professional Football (Soccer). Res. Sports Med. 2018, 26, 51–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Ferraz, R.; Gonçalves, B.; Tillaar, R.; Saiz, S.; Sampaio, J.; Marques, M. Effects of Knowing the Task Duration on Players’ Pacing Patterns during Soccer Small-Sided Games. J. Sports Sci. 2017, 36, 116–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Ferraz, R.; Gonçalves, B.; Coutinho, D.; Oliveira, R.; Travassos, B.; Sampaio, J.; Marques, M.C. Effects of Knowing the Task’s Duration on Soccer Players’ Positioning and Pacing Behaviour during Small-Sided Games. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 11, 3843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Gonçalves, B.; Marcelino, R.; Torres-Ronda, L.; Torrents, C.; Sampaio, J. Effects of Emphasising Opposition and Cooperation on Collective Movement Behaviour during Football Small-Sided Games. J. Sports Sci. 2016, 34, 1346–1354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Gonçalves, B.V.; Figueira, B.E.; Maçãs, V.; Sampaio, J. Effect of Player Position on Movement Behaviour, Physical and Physiological Performances during an 11-a-Side Football Game. J. Sports Sci. 2014, 32, 191–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Ferraz, R.; Gonçalves, B.; Coutinho, D.; Marinho, D.A.; Sampaio, J.; Marques, M.C. Pacing Behaviour of Players in Team Sports: Influence of Match Status Manipulation and Task Duration Knowledge. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0192399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  80. Barros, R.M.L.; Misuta, M.S.; Menezes, R.P.; Figueroa, P.J.; Moura, F.A.; Cunha, S.A.; Anido, R.; Leite, N.J. Analysis of the Distances Covered by First Division Brazilian Soccer Players Obtained with an Automatic Tracking Method. J. Sports Sci. Med. 2007, 6, 233–242. [Google Scholar]
  81. Dellal, A.; Wong, D.P.; Moalla, W.; Chamari, K. Physical and Technical Activity of Soccer Players in the French First League—With Special Reference to Their Playing Position. Int. Sportmed J. 2010, 11, 278–290. [Google Scholar]
  82. Aquino, R.; Vieira, L.H.P.; Carling, C.; Martins, G.H.M.; Alves, I.S.; Puggina, E.F. Effects of Competitive Standard, Team Formation and Playing Position on Match Running Performance of Brazilian Professional Soccer Players. Int. J. Perform. Anal. Sport 2017, 17, 695–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Bradley, P.S.; Lago-Peñas, C.; Rey, E.; Sampaio, J. The Influence of Situational Variables on Ball Possession in the English Premier League. J. Sports Sci. 2014, 32, 1867–1873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Silva, R.; Ceylan, H.; Georgian, B.; Nobari, H.; Carvalho, S.; Sant’ana, T.; Mendes, B.; Chen, Y.S.; Clemente, F. Match-to-Match Variations in External Load Measures during Congested Weeks in Professional Male Soccer Players. J. Men’s Health 2021, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Gregson, W.; Drust, B.; Atkinson, G.; Salvo, V. Match-to-Match Variability of High-Speed Activities in Premier League Soccer. Int. J. Sports Med. 2010, 31, 237–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  86. Yi, Q.; Gómez-Ruano, M.-Á.; Liu, H.; Zhang, S.; Gao, B.; Wunderlich, F.; Memmert, D. Evaluation of the Technical Performance of Football Players in the UEFA Champions League. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Yi, Q.; Gómez, M.-Á.; Liu, H.; Gao, B.; Wunderlich, F.; Memmert, D. Situational and Positional Effects on the Technical Variation of Players in the UEFA Champions League. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 1201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Kubayi, A.; Toriola, A. The Influence of Situational Variables on Ball Possession in the South African Premier Soccer League. J. Hum. Kinet. 2019, 66, 175–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  89. Trecroci, A.; Porcelli, S.; Perri, E.; Pedrali, M.; Rasica, L.; Alberti, G.; Longo, S.; Iaia, F.M. Effects of Different Training Interventions on the Recovery of Physical and Neuromuscular Performance after a Soccer Match. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2020, 34, 2189–2196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Trecroci, A.; Boccolini, G.; Duca, M.; Formenti, D.; Alberti, G. Mental Fatigue Impairs Physical Activity, Technical and Decision-Making Performance during Small-Sided Games. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0238461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Branquinho, L.; Ferraz, R.; Travassos, B.; Marinho, D.A.; Marques, M.C. Effects of Different Recovery Times on Internal and External Load During Small-Sided Games in Soccer. Sports Health 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  92. Teixeira, J.E.; Forte, P.; Ferraz, R.; Leal, M.; Ribeiro, J.; Silva, A.J.; Barbosa, T.M.; Monteiro, A.M. Quantifying Sub-Elite Youth Football Weekly Training Load and Recovery Variation. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 4871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Entropy 23 00973 g001 550
Figure 1. The effects of contextual factors on match running performance according to playing positions were reported using standardized (Cohen) differences, following the match location (A1–F1), quality of opposition (A2–F2) and the match outcome (A3–F3). Trivial area was calculated from the smallest worthwhile change determined as 0.2 times the between-playing positions. Abbreviations: CD—central defenders; CM—central midfielders; DEC—decelerations; FB—fullbacks; FW—forwards; Km—kilometers; m—meters; m · min−1—meters per minute; n—number; WM—wide midfielders.
Figure 1. The effects of contextual factors on match running performance according to playing positions were reported using standardized (Cohen) differences, following the match location (A1–F1), quality of opposition (A2–F2) and the match outcome (A3–F3). Trivial area was calculated from the smallest worthwhile change determined as 0.2 times the between-playing positions. Abbreviations: CD—central defenders; CM—central midfielders; DEC—decelerations; FB—fullbacks; FW—forwards; Km—kilometers; m—meters; m · min−1—meters per minute; n—number; WM—wide midfielders.
Entropy 23 00973 g001
Entropy 23 00973 g002 550
Figure 2. Match running performance according to playing position: (a) total distance covered (km), (b) average speed expressed in distance covered per minute (m · min−1), (c) distance at relative high-speed running (m) and (d) number of sprints, accelerations and decelerations. Abbreviations: ACC—accelerations; ALL—overall independent position group; AvS—average speed; CD—central defenders; CM—central midfielders; DEC—decelerations; FB—fullbacks; FW—forwards; km—kilometers; m—meters; m · min−1—meters per minute; n—number; rHSR—relative high-speed running; SPR—sprints; WM—wide midfielders.
Figure 2. Match running performance according to playing position: (a) total distance covered (km), (b) average speed expressed in distance covered per minute (m · min−1), (c) distance at relative high-speed running (m) and (d) number of sprints, accelerations and decelerations. Abbreviations: ACC—accelerations; ALL—overall independent position group; AvS—average speed; CD—central defenders; CM—central midfielders; DEC—decelerations; FB—fullbacks; FW—forwards; km—kilometers; m—meters; m · min−1—meters per minute; n—number; rHSR—relative high-speed running; SPR—sprints; WM—wide midfielders.
Entropy 23 00973 g002
Table
Table 1. Mean match running performance according to contextual factors.
Table 1. Mean match running performance according to contextual factors.
Match Location
(n = 128)		Quality of Opposition (n = 128)Match Outcome (n = 128)
MeasuresAway
(n = 60)		Home
(n = 68)		Low-Rank
(n = 36)		Medium-Rank (n = 41)High-Rank (n = 51)Lose (n = 61)Draw (n = 36)Win (n = 31)
TD (km)10.91 ± 0.8310.95 ± 0.8110.90 ± 0.7910.86 ± 0.7310.99 ± 0.9110.89 ± 0.8410.92 ± 0.7811.00 ± 0.85
AvS (m · min−1)0.63 ± 0.230.66 ± 0.250.59 ± 0.240.62 ± 0.240.69 ± 0.240.064 ± 0.230.66 ± 0.280.64 ± 0.24
rHSR (m)68.62 ± 15.2364.17 ± 20.4169.94 ± 15.7361.00 ± 19.9568.57 ± 16.9167.90 ± 15.4161.56 ± 21.2769.61 ±17.64
SPR (n)88.74 ± 23.4881.32 ± 23.6085.53 ± 20.3984.41 ± 26.6185.75 ± 23.9387.29 ± 20.4178.08 ± 23.8989.58 ± 28.21
ACC (n)40.32 ± 13.4842.03 ± 15.3339.28 ± 14.1539.95 ± 14.0943.37 ± 14.6640.48 ± 13.4442.28 ± 16.1941.07 ± 14.19
DEC (n)0.09 ± 0.010.09 ± 0.010.09 ± 0.010.09 ± 0.010.09 ± 0.010.09 ± 0.010.09 ± 0.010.09 ± 0.018
ACC—accelerations; ALL—overall independent position group; AvS—average speed; CD—central defenders; CM—central midfielders; DEC—decelerations; FB—fullbacks; FW—forwards; rHSR—relative high-speed running; SPR—sprints; TD—total distance; WM—wide midfielders.
Table
Table 2. Cohen’s d, 95% confidence intervals and smallest worthwhile changes for the influence of match location on match running performance according to playing positions.
Table 2. Cohen’s d, 95% confidence intervals and smallest worthwhile changes for the influence of match location on match running performance according to playing positions.
VariablesPlaying Positions
MeasuresInferenceCD vs. FBCD vs. WMCD vs. CMCD vs. FWFB vs. WMFB vs. CMFB vs. FWCM vs. WMCM vs. FWWM vs. FW
TD (km)d0.660.811.570.210.730.970.540.331.641.58
95% CI0.55–0.770.57–1.051.32–1.820.17–0.250.60–0.860.80–1.140.38–0.700.27–0.391.41–1.871.29–1.87
SWC0.130.280.290.040.150.200.190.070.270.34
AvS (m · min−1)d0.550.580.920.060.490.981.170.521.561.26
95% CI0.37–0.730.52–0.640.87–0.970.03–0.090.44–0.540.92–1.041.14–1.200.51–0.531.55–1.571.23–1.29
SWC0.210.060.060.030.060.060.040.010.010.03
rHSR (m)d0.660.811.570.210.730.970.540.331.641.58
95% CI0.50–0.820.78–0.841.52–1.620.12–0.300.70–0.760.96–0.990.42–0.570.19–0.471.62–1.661.55–1.61
SWC0.180.030.060.100.040.011.100.160.020.03
SPR (n)d1.381.290.510.430.790.590.791.210.151.39
95% CI1.33–1.431.27–1.310.49–0.530.38–0.480.78–0.800.58–0.590.23–1.351.14–1.280.07–0.231.00–1.78
SWC0.060.030.030.050.020.010.640.080.090.45
ACC (n)d0.380.330.200.590.870.300.520.920.590.67
95% CI0.51–0.611.27–1.370.56–0.700.48–0.491.92–2.160.55–0.780.67–0.850.97–1.011.60–1.711.04–1.08
SWC0.060.060.080.010.140.130.100.020.070.03
DEC (n)d0.560.560.630.492.040.660.760.991.651.06
95% CI0.01–1.141.98–2.311.14–1.270.55–0.621.26–1.620.53–0.630.51–0.611.25–1.341.89–1.990.67–1.40
SWC0.080.190.080.040.210.060.050.050.060.42
Abbreviations: ACC—accelerations; AvS—average speed; CD—central defenders; CI—confidence intervals; CM—central midfielders; d—Cohen differences; DEC—decelerations; FB—fullbacks; FW—forwards; rHSR—relative high speed running; SPR—sprints; SWC—smallest worthwhile changes; TD—total distance; WM—wide midfielders.
Table
Table 3. Cohen’s d, 95% confidence intervals and smallest worthwhile change for the influence of quality of opposition on match running performance according to playing positions.
Table 3. Cohen’s d, 95% confidence intervals and smallest worthwhile change for the influence of quality of opposition on match running performance according to playing positions.
VariablesPlaying Positions
MeasuresInferenceCD vs. FBCD vs. WMCD vs. CMCD vs. FWFB vs. WMFB vs. CMFB vs. FWCM vs. WMCM vs. FWWM vs. FW
TD (km)d0.661.631.070.760.831.091.220.351.332.14
95% CI0.62–0.701.58–1.681.00–1.140.69–0.830.76–0.901.03–1.151.18–1.260.34–0.351.20–1.461.88–2.40
SWC0.050.060.080.080.080.060.040.010.150.30
AvS (m · min−1)d0.451.131.530.381.531.070.910.530.131.59
95% CI0.41–0.491.04–1.221.50–1.560.26–0.501.42–1.641.00–1.140.87–0.950.48–0.580.08–0.181.38–1.80
SWC 0.050.100.040.140.120.080.050.060.060.24
rHSR (m)d0.570.951.060.390.740.980.860.341.151.79
95% CI0.46–0.680.83–1.071.01–1.110.33–0.450.71–0.770.96–1.000.73–0.990.33–0.351.14–1.151.77–1.81
SWC0.130.140.060.070.030.030.150.010.010.02
SPR (n)d1.391.930.510.720.930.621.091.281.741.79
95% CI1.35–1.431.83–2.030.46–0.560.54–0.900.88–0.980.61–0.631.00–1.181.27–1.281.70–1.780.45–3.13
SWC0.050.120.060.210.050.010.100.010.041.55
ACC (n)d0.821.210.550.291.290.520.560.981.671.91
95% CI0.71–0.931.04–1.380.52–0.580.28–0.301.16–1.420.49–0.550.50–0.620.95–1.011.64–1.701.76–2.06
SWC0.130.200.030.010.150.030.060.040.030.18
DEC (n)d0.921.781.440.621.420.850.420.421.271.06
95% CI0.76–1.081.47–2.091.19–1.690.51–0.731.17–1.670.70–1.000.35–0.490.35–0.491.05–1.490.88–1.24
SWC0.180.360.290.120.280.170.080.080.250.21
Abbreviations: ACC—accelerations; AvS—average speed; CD—central defenders; CI—confidence intervals; CM—central midfielders; d—Cohen differences; DEC—decelerations; FB—fullbacks; FW—forwards; rHSR—relative high speed running; SPR—sprints; SWC—smallest worthwhile changes; TD—total distance; WM—wide midfielders.
Table
Table 4. Cohen’s d, 95% confidence intervals and smallest worthwhile changes for the influence of match outcome on match running performance according to playing positions.
Table 4. Cohen’s d, 95% confidence intervals and smallest worthwhile changes for the influence of match outcome on match running performance according to playing positions.
VariablesPlaying Positions
MeasuresInferenceCD vs. FBCD vs. WMCD vs. CMCD vs. FWFB vs. WMFB vs. CMFB vs. FWCM vs. WMCM vs. FWWM vs. FW
TD (km)d1.070.390.740.981.860.341.151.791.070.39
95% CI0.81–1.330.09–0.690.45–1.030.97–0.991.79–1.930.26–0.420.98–1.321.78–1.790.90–1.240.22–0.56
SWC0.300.350.330.010.080.090.190.010.190.20
AvS (m · min−1)d0.661.181.540.170.550.960.510.520.011.17
95% CI0.47–0.851.12–1.241.49–1.590.10–0.240.49–0.610.90–1.020.41–0.610.51–0.53–0.02–0.031.11–1.23
SWC0.220.070.060.090.070.070.120.010.040.07
rHSR (m)d2.122.490.611.720.850.791.831.361.110.69
95% CI1.97–2.272.38–2.600.58–0.641.69–1.750.82–0.880.77–0.811.81–1.851.21–1.511.07–1.150.63–0.75
SWC0.170.130.030.040.040.020.030.170.050.07
SPR (n)d1.691.510.961.311.250.481.021.231.951.68
95% CI1.49–1.891.48–1.540.88–1.041.28–1.341.20–1.300.44–0.520.98–1.061.14–1.321.78–2.121.62–1.74
SWC0.230.040.100.030.060.050.050.100.200.07
ACC (n)d0.561.320.630.492.040.660.760.991.661.06
95% CI0.53–0.591.19–1.450.60–0.660.46–0.522.00–2.080.63–0.690.74–0.780.91–1.071.64–1.681.00–1.12
SWC0.030.150.030.030.050.040.030.090.020.07
DEC (n)d1.072.141.210.591.440.580.561.291.941.03
95% CI1.00–1.141.97–2.311.14–1.280.55–0.631.43–1.450.53–0.630.51–0.611.25–1.331.89–1.991.01–1.05
SWC0.080.190.080.040.010.060.050.050.060.02
Abbreviations: ACC—accelerations; AvS—average speed; CD—central defenders; CI—confidence intervals; CM—central midfielders; d—Cohen differences; DEC—decelerations; FB—fullbacks; FW—forwards; rHSR—relative high speed running; SPR—sprints; SWC—smallest worthwhile changes; TD—total distance; WM—wide midfielders.
Table
Table 5. Mean match running performance according to playing position.
Table 5. Mean match running performance according to playing position.
MeasuresCD (n = 36)FB (n = 31)WM (n = 19)CM (n = 33)FW (n = 9)ALL (n = 128)Follow-Up
(Post Hoc’s)
TD (km)10.42 ± 0.6910.82 ± 0.6411.29 ± 0.5511.54 ± 0.7610.27 ± 0.6910.93 ± 0.82CM = WM > FB > FW > CD
AvS (m · min−1)0.09 ± 0.070.09 ± 0.010.09 ± 0.010.09 ± 0.010.09 ± 0.010.09 ± 0.01CM = WM > FB > FW > CD
rHSR (m)0.49 ± 0.660.77 ± 0.170.89 ± 0.210.58 ± 0.240.52 ± 0.210.64 ± 0.24WM = FB > CM > FW > CD
SPR (n)32.19 ± 10.6246.26 ± 10.5855.58 ± 12.2038.73 ± 14.6637.44 ± 12.7641.13 ± 1.27WM = FB > CM > FW > CD
ACC (n)62.53 ± 17.4766.52 ± 8.7680.89 ± 21.5961.67 ± 20.7570.11 ± 5.1166.53 ± 1.58FB = FW = WM > CM > CD
DEC (n)69.17 ± 14.1483.42 ± 12.12103.42 ± 21.5796.42 ± 29.0877.89 ± 11.4741.13 ± 23.74WM = CM > FB > FW > CD
ACC—accelerations; ALL—overall independent position group; AvS—average speed; CD—central defenders; CM—central midfielders; DEC—decelerations; FB—fullbacks; FW—forwards; rHSR—relative high-speed running; SPR—sprints; TD—total distance; WM—wide midfielders.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Teixeira, J.E.; Leal, M.; Ferraz, R.; Ribeiro, J.; Cachada, J.M.; Barbosa, T.M.; Monteiro, A.M.; Forte, P. Effects of Match Location, Quality of Opposition and Match Outcome on Match Running Performance in a Portuguese Professional Football Team. Entropy 2021, 23, 973. https://doi.org/10.3390/e23080973

AMA Style

Teixeira JE, Leal M, Ferraz R, Ribeiro J, Cachada JM, Barbosa TM, Monteiro AM, Forte P. Effects of Match Location, Quality of Opposition and Match Outcome on Match Running Performance in a Portuguese Professional Football Team. Entropy. 2021; 23(8):973. https://doi.org/10.3390/e23080973

Chicago/Turabian Style

Teixeira, José E., Miguel Leal, Ricardo Ferraz, Joana Ribeiro, José M. Cachada, Tiago M. Barbosa, António M. Monteiro, and Pedro Forte. 2021. "Effects of Match Location, Quality of Opposition and Match Outcome on Match Running Performance in a Portuguese Professional Football Team" Entropy 23, no. 8: 973. https://doi.org/10.3390/e23080973

APA Style

Teixeira, J. E., Leal, M., Ferraz, R., Ribeiro, J., Cachada, J. M., Barbosa, T. M., Monteiro, A. M., & Forte, P. (2021). Effects of Match Location, Quality of Opposition and Match Outcome on Match Running Performance in a Portuguese Professional Football Team. Entropy, 23(8), 973. https://doi.org/10.3390/e23080973

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop