Next Article in Journal
Hardware-Based Architecture for DNN Wireless Communication Models
Next Article in Special Issue
Visual Behaviours of Expert Padel Athletes When Playing on Court: An In Situ Approach with a Portable Eye Tracker
Previous Article in Journal
Smart Shoe Insole Based on Polydimethylsiloxane Composite Capacitive Sensors
Previous Article in Special Issue
Feasibility of a Novel Therapist-Assisted Feedback System for Gait Training in Parkinson’s Disease
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sensors
Volume 23
Issue 3
10.3390/s23031299
sensors-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

The Influence of Pitch Dimensions during Small-Sided Games to Reach Match Physical and Physiological Demands on the Youth Soccer Players

by
Alfonso Castillo-Rodríguez
1,*,
Álvaro Durán-Salas
1,
Jesús Vicente Giménez
1,*,
Wanesa Onetti-Onetti
2 and
Luis Suárez-Arrones
3
1
Department of Physical Education and Sports, University of Granada, 18011 Granada, Spain
2
Facultad de Educación, Universidad Internacional de la Rioja, 26006 Logroño, Spain
3
Department of Sports and Computer, University of Pablo de Olavide, 41013 Seville, Spain
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2023, 23(3), 1299; https://doi.org/10.3390/s23031299
Submission received: 6 November 2022 / Revised: 16 January 2023 / Accepted: 18 January 2023 / Published: 23 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Applications, Wearables and Sensing Technology in Sports and Physical Activity)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The aims of this study were to (i) analyze the physical and physiological responses of four matches competition and (ii) to investigate the relationships among three different pitch dimensions of small-sided game (SSG) on the youth soccer players. Fifteen male U19 soccer players (age 17.3 ± 0.5 years, height 175.7 ± 5.6 cm, weight 68.5 ± 8.6 kg, playing experience 7.8 ± 1.4 years) were randomly assigned to three play areas: small (50 m2), medium (SSG-m, 150 m2) and large (SSG-l, 250 m2) area per player including goalkeeper. During the 4-week intervention, both groups performed three sets of 8 min with a passive rest period of 5 min between games. Differences in time-motion characteristics of players were measured with the Global Positioning System and assessed using a repeated measures ANOVA to compare the three game conditions and the magnitude-based inference to evaluate the pairwise comparison effects. The results showed that only the variables distance covered between 7.0–12.9 km·h−1 was not statistically significantly different among game conditions (p < 0.05; η = 0.21; small) and physiological response (i.e., hear rate of playing time spent 85–89% HRmax) also showed differences (p < 0.05; η = 0.25; small). The responses in SSG-m and SSG-l established them ass the format sizes ideal for replicating the physical responses during match competition. These findings could provide relevant information for coaches for use adequate pitch size (areas of 150 m2 and 250 m2) to reach the match-play scenarios found in match competition.

1. Introduction

Soccer is a team sport with high-intensity intermittent actions, where performance depends on different technical, tactical, biomechanical, psychological, and physiological factors [1,2,3]. Previous research analyzed the training methodology aspects [4] with the purpose of understanding the training process regard to competition [5], where small-sided games (SSGs) are a method widely used usual in soccer training at all levels or ages, from elite teams to children. SSGs simultaneously allow for the improvement of physical and physiological performance alongside technical and tactical aspects utilizing smaller number of players (compared to 11 vs. 11) on a smaller sized pitch [6,7]. SSGs are commonly used by coaches along the micro-cycle (week planning) [8] with different conditional and technical–tactical objectives [9].
Technological advances of the last years have made it possible to monitor a player’s running activity during training sessions and competition using Global Positioning System (GPS) technology. The external (i.e., total distance covered) and internal loads (such as heart rate [HR]) are registered with reliable and valid devices and therefore, could be used in order to improve the training sessions’ quantification and planning [10]. In these sessions, coaches planned training tasks modifying the dimensions of game (pitch size and playing area) [11,12,13], the number of player involved, pitch format, tactical/technical instructions, limits to ball touches or the type of training (e.g., continuous, intermittent, work-to-rest ratio) [9,14,15], the availability of replacement balls, the presence of the goalkeepers, the encouragement of the coach [16], and particularly the rules. All these factors could vary significantly the physiological [17] and physical [18] responses of players.
Currently, during SSGs the pitch dimensions have become a research interest. Previous investigations have sought to compare the acute demands of pitch size [19,20] based on individual area per player (ApP), [21,22,23] as well as the effect of length-to-width ratio. Previous research showed that SSG in a small pitch size (based on individual ApP) induced higher HR and blood lactate concentration [24] compared to large pitch size, because smaller pitches involved a greater number of accelerations, decelerations, and changes of direction [25], in addition to a greater number of technical and tactical actions. However, greater dimensions could perform higher total distances, distance at high speed, among others [25].
To the authors’ knowledge, the physical and physiological responses of different sizes small (SSG-s), medium (SSG-m), and large (SSG-l) SSGs with ApP of 50 m2, 150 m2, 250 m2, respectively, including goalkeeper with the same number of players and their comparison with official games have not been deeply investigated, although the effect of pitch size has been checked and studied in amateur and professional soccer players [26]. Using the competition as a reference in order to prescribe soccer drills and junior players, our hypothesis is to consider the SSG-l are the most appropriate drills to simulate the demands of competition in adolescence soccer players. This information may be useful to coaches to develop the technical and tactical abilities of the players with similar physical and physiological requirements to the competition [27]. Thus, the aim of this study was to assess the effect of different pitch size (SSG-s, SSG-m, and SSG-l) with dimensions proportional to those carried out in competition on the physical and physiological responses in young male soccer players, and their comparison with those obtained during official games.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

Fifteen U19 soccer players voluntarily participated in this study (age 17.3 ± 0.5 years, height 175.7 ± 5.6 cm, weight 68.5 ± 8.6 kg). All the recruited players were members of the same team that competed at the regional league level in the South of Spain, with an average of 8.4 (±2.1) years of experience in soccer. They had an average of 5.9 (±3.5) seasons of experience at a high competitive level. In addition, they trained an average of 8.2 (±1.7) hours per week 5 days a week (not including competition day). All the players (or tutor for players under 18) were carefully informed about the experiment’s procedures and about the potential risk and benefits associated with participation in the study and signed an informed consent document before being included in the study. This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Granada (Number 471/CEIH/2018) and followed the guidelines set forth in the Declaration of Helsinki (2013). The inclusion criteria were to have been competing for the last four years and available to attend regular training sessions. These criteria were designed to ensure that the participants had sufficient experience and ensure its homogeneity.

2.2. Experimental Procedures

An observational design was used to examine the internal and external loads of young soccer players during SSGs and competitive matches using GPS technology and HR response. The study was carried out during a period of 5 weeks between December and January of the competition season 2017–2018. In total, four training sessions (one per week) and four official matches were registered. Before these evaluation weeks, two sessions (in the first week) were dedicated to familiarizing the players with the GPS devices and the different pitch sizes’ drills. In this study, authors considered that evaluated drills are equivalent terms SSGs. These exercises had characteristics similar to those found during the evaluation process (the training drills were similar to those carried out in the 4 weeks of evaluation (they contained tasks from SSG-s, SSG-m and SSG-l)). The evaluation of training sessions and competition matches were carried out at the same time, preceded by a 15-min standard warm-up. All the SSGs performed during the same session were played with the same lineup of players on each team, and players of different positions and roles integrated the teams. During each training session three drills were played corresponding to the three SSGs situations, i.e., SSG-s, SSG-m and SSG-l. The SSGs lasted 8 min with a 5 min passive break between drills, similar to the protocol established by Casamichana and Castellano [25]. The order of play of the different SSGs varied from one session to the next to assure that fatigue was not an influence. Drinking water during the breaks between SSGs was permitted. During evaluation, the GPS devices were worn by each of the four players. The same data was collected for all playing positions: external defenders (ED), internal defenders (ID), external midfielders (EM), internal midfielders (IM), and forwards (FO) [28].
In order to avoid any potential imbalance among the participating players, certain individual and collective aspects were taken into account in the creation of this study: technical-tactical level, participation in match competitions, and playing position. Following the procedure used in a previous study [25], the technical-tactical level of the player was established according to the subjective evaluation of the coach, who rated the player from 1 (lowest level) to 5 (highest level). The number of minutes played in match competitions (before their inclusion in the study) was also used to categorize the players. The usual playing position of the participants (ED, ID, EM, IM, and FO) [28] was registered. Finally, two comparable teams in terms of the subjectivity of the coach, number of minutes played and playing position were created [29].

2.3. Individual Playing Area (ApP)

All SSGs were played outdoors in a soccer field with artificial grass. The technical-tactical nature of the SSGs was always similar to that of a competitive match. They were matches in small spaces, but with the same rules of play. During each SSG two opposing teams consisting of 5 versus 5 players and goalkeepers faced each other. The pitch size was variable, but the relative dimensions (length/width) were maintained. These calculations were carried out through equations of the second degree. The SSG-l had the same ApP that during home matches, however, the main difference is that in official matches (11 × 11) they played at 102 × 54 m and in SSG-l (5 × 5) at 75 × 40 m. For the other formats used (SSG-MSSG-m and SSG-s), the ApP was reduced by ~100 m2 and ~200 m2, respectively [25]. The goalkeepers were taken into account in the calculation of ApP. The SSGs characteristics are in Table 1.

2.4. Exercise Intensity

Exercise intensity was quantified by monitoring HR using the Polar S610i (Polar Electro OY, Finland) devices during SSGs and games. Four zones of exercise intensity were established according to the individual HRmax (<75% HRmax, 75–84% HRmax, 85–89% HRmax, >90% HRmax) [30]. The maximal HR of the players was obtained throughout an incremental field test (the highest 5-s average recorded during the test) [31]. Furthermore, the percentage of time that players spent in each zone of intensity during the SSGs was recorded. The variables analyzed were minimum HR (HRmin), mean HR (HRmean), and HRmax for each SSG.

2.5. Running Demands Analysis

Speed and distance covered was measured using GPS technology (SPI-PRO, GPSports, Canberra, Australia) with the software Team AMS 1.2. These GPS devices operate at 5 Hz. Their reliability was previously tested [32] with results ranging from 2% to 13% during sprinting with an underestimation of 4% for these distances. The GPS registered the total distance (TD) and distances covered at different speeds during the SSGs and official games. Players’ activities were codified in 5 categories and speed thresholds [29]: walking (0.1–6.9 km·h−1), low-intensity running (7.0–12.9 km·h−1), medium-intensity running (13.0–17.9 km·h−1), high-intensity running (18.0–20.9 km·h−1), and sprinting (>21.0 km·h−1). The average number of satellites registered during the SSGs was 8 ± 1.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

Data are shown as means and standard deviations with a 95% confidence interval. The Levene test was performed for assessment of uniformity of variance, and a one-way ANOVA was performed to determine the differences in dependent variables (physical and physiological responses) and the independent variable was the pitch size (with three different ApP) corresponding to the respective SSGs (SSG-s, SSG-m and SSG-l). The eta-squared values were calculated to estimate effect sizes of ANOVA. Subsequently, if data met the requirements of homoscedasticity, a Bonferroni correction was performed to make comparisons between pairs; if not, a Games-Howell test was performed. The effect sizes were calculated on all comparisons using the following criteria [33]: for ANOVA tests, those values (η2) were 0.10 for small effects, 0.25 for moderate effects, and 0.40 for large effects. Subsequently, a linear regression analysis (stepwise method) was performed between the physiological responses and the distance covered per minute. SPSS for Windows v.23.0 was the statistical software used. The level of significance was set at p < 0.05.

3. Results

Table 2 shows the physiological responses of the players during the different pitch size of SSG (SSG-s, SSG-m, and SSG-l) and the official game (first [H1] and second halves [H2]). There were no significant differences between the SSG-s and the official game, except for the playing time spent between 75–84% HRmax, where differences between SSG-l vs. H2 were detected (p < 0.05). Playing time spent between 85–89% HRmax was the best physiological variable that explains the distance per minute covered by the players (R2: 19.2%; SEE: 17.311; p < 0.0001).
Table 3 and Figure 1 show the movement patterns of the players during the different SSG formats (SSG-s, SSG-m, and SSG-l) and the official games (H1 and H2). Absolute total distance and distance covered at different speeds during each half was significantly higher vs. SSGs. Relative total distance covered during the SSG-l was significantly higher vs. SSGs and the official games (p < 0.01). Relative total distance covered, and maximal speed reached during the SSG-s was significantly lower vs. SSG-m, SSG-l and the official games (p < 0.01). Maximal speed reached during the first half of the game was significantly higher vs. SSG-s and SSG-m (p < 0.01, respectively), but with no differences vs. SSG-l. Percentage of playing time running at high intensity and sprinting during each half was significantly higher only vs. SSG-s (p < 0.01), with no differences vs. SSG-m and SSG-l.

4. Discussion

The aims of this study were to assess the effect of different pitch size (SSG-s, SSG-m, and SSG-l) on the physical and physiological responses in young male soccer players, and to compare these metrics with those obtained during official games. The initial hypothesis was to consider that the SSG-l with similar characteristics and rules as the competition could present similar external and internal load in comparison with the official matches. The results of the present study showed different movement patterns within the different pitch size formats. The results obtained in these SSGs can be transferred and discussed with respect to the demands in the competition study because they are relative data, depending on the playing time. However, information on absolute values has been shown too so that readers can know real values of the demands both in SSGs and in competition. Similar physiological responses were also shown in a previous study that compared the HR responses during SSGs and competition [11]. Our results showed that the running demands during the SSG-s were lower in comparison with SSG-m, SSG-l and official matches, while the movement patterns relative to playing time between SSG-m and SSG-l were similar to the competition, or even most demanding in some parameters evaluated, in the case of SSG-l (i.e., relative total distance). This fact has also occurred in a previous study that compared SSG with 60 and 80 m2 of ApP, clearly showing that the second SSG presented greater demands from the players and closer to competition [6]. In this line, previous studies showed that the physical and physiological responses, obtained during SSG-m and SSG-l formats, were consistent with those produced during competition matches [12,34]. In contrast, a previous study found a similar response in all the contexts [13]. Our findings indicated that SSG-l and SSG-m were specific alternatives to running generic exercises in order to train with real demands based on competition. In addition, a previous study demonstrated that a seven-week warm-up training period, using SSGs, improved soccer players’ performance [30].
Previous studies have shown that SSG-m and SSG-l were drills with more similar running demands in comparison with competition [12,34,35]. The most representative variable of the general intensity of the activity was the distance covered per minute (relative distance covered) [25]. Our study showed relative distances covered from 82 to 119 m·min−1 for SSG-s and SSG-l, respectively. These results were comparable to those shown by Casamicha et al. [25] with relative distances covered ranged from 87 to 125 m·min−1 for SSG-s and SSG-l. In our case, the SSG-m showed similar relative distance covered per minute in comparison to the official matches (first half), with higher relative running demands for SSG-l in comparison with the competition (119 and 103 m·min−1, respectively).
The physiological responses shown during the different SSGs in the present study was similar to previous studies [10,27,34], and without statistical differences in comparison with the official matches. In this regard, the SSGs used in this study were useful drills to improve specific endurance in young male soccer players with HRmax between 88% for SSG-s to 91% for SSG-l. Previous studies showed similar results with HRmax from 86–89% [25,34], 89–91% [11,36], and 91% [37]. Training intensities at or slightly higher than the anaerobic threshold (85–90% HRmax) appear to be effective for improving the aerobic performance of soccer players [36]. In addition, other studies have demonstrated the ability of SSGs to improve physical and physiological condition after a period of detraining (rest period after the competition season) [38]. Coaches must carefully design their SSGs because these results showed that the internal and external loads experienced by players were affected by the different formats of SSGs. Based on this, we should decide that if we want to simulate the demands of the competition, the physical and physiological response during SSG-s is not the most suitable if you want to train as you compete, being SSG-m and SSG-l more suitable in this case. In this line, a previous study has already described that high-level players do not train as they compete, with large differences (and high effect sizes) in the quantification of training and competition loads [39].
One of the limitations of this study was the sample size, due basically to the relative inaccessibility to high level U19 soccer players. In addition, the availability of four portable devices made it difficult to obtain a greater amount of data, while the number of evaluation days and analyzed matches increased. Therefore, the data collected is rigorous, although not generalizable due to the limited sample size. Despite this limitation, the authors of this study were able to collect and process a series of data that can help coaches to plan more efficient training sessions focused on optimal preparation for competition matches. On the other hand, the subjective perception of the effort could have been assessed in order to compare or relate it to the objective variables of the study evaluated through GPS devices. Furthermore, in light of the findings of this study, there is a need to encourage future researchers to carry out similar studies using a greater number of training sessions in order to evaluate more precisely the coefficient of variation of the physical and physiological responses in relation to competition. As strengths, the study has considered that in SSG-s, players performed more high-intensity activities (i.e., accelerations and decelerations) and could be useful for increasing neuromuscular adaptations during SSG training [5]. Furthermore, it is established for formative soccer, as lines in the teaching methodology that problem solving performed in SSGs with medium and large pitch sizes were similar to those reproduced in competition and could open a wide number of tasks to reproduce, without giving the soccer player a longer decision-making time.

5. Conclusions

The main finding of this study showed that for soccer training drills, the ApP should be taken into consideration to get physical and physiological responses similar to those produced during official games. SSGs should incorporate specific aspects about ApP to replicate the demands of competitive matches. If the ApP is 50 m2 (SSG-s), only a low level of physical conditioning is achieved. The drills with ApPs most suitable for inducing the physical and physiological responses demanded during competitive matches were 150 m2 and 250 m2 (SSG-m and SSG-l, respectively). With these drills, soccer players get to train how they are going to compete and reach the match-play scenarios found during official games.
As practical applications, it is recommended that the coaches and physical trainers in soccer design SSG with ApP of at least 150 m2 so that those players present greater physical demands in order to optimize these responses during the competition. On the other hand and according to the results of this study, the physiological demands of the players are covered in the three SSGs studied (50 m2, 150 m2, and 250 m2) with respect to the demands of official matches required. Although the physical and physiological demands during SSG-m and SSG-l are closer to competition, all the SSG could produce improvements in fitness and at a technical and tactical level. However, to be adapted to the game, it is necessary to perform drills that, in addition to technical and tactical improvement, provide those demands that are going to be presented in the competition. For these reasons, the pitch size is very useful and appropriate consideration for coaches and technical staff when increasing or decreasing the external load in the soccer players.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.C.-R., W.O.-O. and L.S.-A.; methodology, W.O.-O. and J.V.G.; software, W.O.-O. and Á.D.-S.; validation, L.S.-A., J.V.G. and L.S.-A.; formal analysis, A.C.-R. and W.O.-O.; investigation, W.O.-O. and A.C.-R.; resources, Á.D.-S.; data curation, J.V.G.; writing—original draft preparation, L.S.-A. and A.C.-R.; writing—review and editing, Á.D.-S., A.C.-R. and L.S.-A.; visualization, J.V.G.; supervision, A.C.-R.; project administration, Á.D.-S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by the contract of Junta de Andalucía-Consejería de Transformación Económica, Industria, Conocimiento y Universidades (POSTDOC_21_00904), and by the FEDER project (P20_00194) of the R+D+i project aid program by the same institution.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Granada University Human Ethics Committee (approval no. 471/CEIH/2018).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author to any qualified researcher, if they have obtained Ethics Approval for secondary use of existing data through a Consent Waiver.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the technical staff and players of both teams who participated in the current investigation. No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Stølen, T.; Chamari, K.; Castagna, C.; Wisløff, U. Physiology of Soccer. Sport. Med. 2005, 35, 501–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Reina Gómez, A.; Hernández Mendo, A. Revisión de Indicadores de Rendimiento En Fútbol. Rev. Iberoam. Cienc. Act. Física Deporte 2012, 1, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Martín-López, Á.; Mendes, R.S.; Castillo-Rodríguez, A. Internal and External Loads in Training Week Before the Competition in U19 High-Level Soccer Players. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2021, 35, 1766–1772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Clemente, F.M.; Lourenço Martins, F.M.; Mendes, R.S. Developing Aerobic and Anaerobic Fitness Using Small-Sided Soccer Games. Strength Cond. J. 2014, 36, 76–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Giménez, J.V.; Jiménez-Linares, L.; Leicht, A.S.; Gómez, M.A. Predictive Modelling of the Physical Demands during Training and Competition in Professional Soccer Players. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2020, 23, 603–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Pantelić, S.; Rađa, A.; Erceg, M.; Milanović, Z.; Trajković, N.; Stojanović, E.; Krustrup, P.; Randers, M.B. Relative Pitch Area Plays an Important Role in Movement Pattern and Intensity in Recreational Male Football. Biol. Sport 2019, 36, 119–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Halouani, J.; Chtourou, H.; Gabbett, T.; Chaouachi, A.; Chamari, K. Small-Sided Games in Team Sports Training. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2014, 28, 3594–3618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Jeong, T.-S.; Reilly, T.; Morton, J.; Bae, S.-W.; Drust, B. Quantification of the Physiological Loading of One Week of “Pre-Season” and One Week of “in-Season” Training in Professional Soccer Players. J. Sport. Sci. 2011, 29, 1161–1166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Sarmento, H.; Clemente, F.M.; Harper, L.D.; da Costa, I.T.; Owen, A.; Figueiredo, A.J. Small Sided Games in Soccer—A Systematic Review. Int. J. Perform. Anal. Sport 2018, 18, 693–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Owen, A.L.; Wong, D.P.; McKenna, M.; Dellal, A. Heart Rate Responses and Technical Comparison Between Small- vs. Large-Sided Games in Elite Professional Soccer. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2011, 25, 2104–2110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Kelly, D.M.; Drust, B. The Effect of Pitch Dimensions on Heart Rate Responses and Technical Demands of Small-Sided Soccer Games in Elite Players. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2009, 12, 475–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Owen, A.; Twist, C.; Ford, P. Small-Sided Games: The Physiological and Technical Effect of Altering Pitch Size and Player Numbers. Insight 2004, 7, 50–53. [Google Scholar]
  13. Tessitore, A.; Meeusen, R.; Piacentini, M.F.; Demarie, S.; Capranica, L. Physiological and Technical Aspects of “‘6-a-Side’” Soccer Drills. J. Sport. Med. Phys. Fit. 2006, 46, 36–43. [Google Scholar]
  14. Ometto, L.; Vasconcellos, F.V.; Cunha, F.A.; Teoldo, I.; Souza, C.R.B.; Dutra, M.B.; O’Sullivan, M.; Davids, K. How Manipulating Task Constraints in Small-Sided and Conditioned Games Shapes Emergence of Individual and Collective Tactical Behaviours in Football: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Sport. Sci. Coach 2018, 13, 1200–1214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Arslan, E.; Alemdaroglu, U.; Koklu, Y.; Hazir, T.; Muniroglu, S.; Karakoc, B. Effects of Passive and Active Rest on Physiological Responses and Time Motion Characteristics in Different Small Sided Soccer Games. J. Hum. Kinet. 2017, 60, 123–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Martínez de Santos, R.; Blanco-Villaseñor, A.; Sánchez, F.J.; Los Arcos, A. Heart Rate Recording Optimization in Soccer. In Science and Football VI; Reilly, T., Korkusuz, A.F., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2009; pp. 267–271. [Google Scholar]
  17. Hill-Haas, S.V.; Dawson, B.; Impellizzeri, F.M.; Coutts, A.J. Physiology of Small-Sided Games Training in Football. Sport. Med. 2011, 41, 199–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bujalance-Moreno, P.; Latorre-Román, P.Á.; García-Pinillos, F. A Systematic Review on Small-Sided Games in Football Players: Acute and Chronic Adaptations. J. Sport. Sci. 2019, 37, 921–949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Castillo, D.; Raya-González, J.; Yanci, J.; Manuel Clemente, F. Influence of Pitch Size on Short-Term High Intensity Actions and Body Impacts in Soccer Sided Games. J. Hum. Kinet. 2021, 78, 187–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Gaudino, P.; Alberti, G.; Iaia, F.M. Estimated Metabolic and Mechanical Demands during Different Small-Sided Games in Elite Soccer Players. Hum. Mov. Sci. 2014, 36, 123–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Riboli, A.; Esposito, F.; Coratella, G. Small-Sided Games in Elite Football: Practical Solutions to Replicate the 4-Min Match-Derived Maximal Intensities. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2022; ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Riboli, A.; Olthof, S.B.H.; Esposito, F.; Coratella, G. Training Elite Youth Soccer Players: Area per Player in Small-Sided Games to Replicate the Match Demands. Biol. Sport 2022, 39, 579–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Riboli, A.; Coratella, G.; Rampichini, S.; Cé, E.; Esposito, F. Area per Player in Small-Sided Games to Replicate the External Load and Estimated Physiological Match Demands in Elite Soccer Players. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0229194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Sampaio, J.E.; Lago, C.; Goncalves, B.; Macas, V.M.; Leite, N. Effects of Pacing, Status and Unbalance in Time Motion Variables, Heart Rate and Tactical Behaviour When Playing 5-a-Side Football Small-Sided Games. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2014, 17, 229–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Casamichana, D.; Castellano, J. Time–Motion, Heart Rate, Perceptual and Motor Behaviour Demands in Small-Sides Soccer Games: Effects of Pitch Size. J. Sport. Sci. 2010, 28, 1615–1623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Clemente, F.M.; Afonso, J.; Sarmento, H. Small-Sided Games: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0247067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hill-Haas, S.V.; Coutts, A.J.; Dawson, B.T.; Rowsell, G.J. Time-Motion Characteristics and Physiological Responses of Small-Sided Games in Elite Youth Players: The Influence of Player Number and Rule Changes. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2010, 24, 2149–2156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Cárdenas-Fernández, V.; Chinchilla-Minguet, J.L.; Castillo-Rodríguez, A. Somatotype and Body Composition in Young Soccer Players According to the Playing Position and Sport Success. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2019, 33, 1904–1911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Casamichana, D.; Castellano, J.; Castagna, C. Comparing the Physical Demands of Friendly Matches and Small-Sided Games in Semiprofessional Soccer Players. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2012, 26, 837–843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Hill-Haas, S.V.; Dawson, B.T.; Coutts, A.J.; Rowsell, G.J. Physiological Responses and Time-Motion Characteristics of Various Small-Sided Soccer Games in Youth Players. J. Sport. Sci. 2009, 27, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Krustrup, P.; Mohr, M.; Amstrup, T.; Rysgaard, T.; Johansen, J.; Steensberg, A.; Pedersen, P.K.; Bangsbo, J. The Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test: Physiological Response, Reliability, and Validity. Med. Sci. Sport. Exerc. 2003, 35, 697–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Petersen, C.; Pyne, D.; Portus, M.; Dawson, B. Validity and Reliability of GPS Units to Monitor Cricket-Specific Movement Patterns. Int. J. Sport. Physiol. Perform. 2009, 4, 381–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 1988. [Google Scholar]
  34. Rampinini, E.; Coutts, A.J.; Castagna, C.; Sassi, R.; Impellizzeri, F. Variation in Top Level Soccer Match Performance. Int. J. Sport. Med. 2007, 28, 1018–1024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Clemente, F.M.; Sarmento, H.; Rabbani, A.; Van Der Linden, C.N.; Kargarfard, M.; Costa, I.T. Variations of External Load Variables between Medium- and Large-Sided Soccer Games in Professional Players. Res. Sport. Med. 2019, 27, 50–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Little, T.; Williams, A.G. Measures of Exercise Intensity during Soccer Training Drills with Professional Soccer Players. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2007, 21, 367–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Hoff, J.; Wisloff, U.; Engen, L.C.; Kemi, O.J.; Helgerud, J. Soccer Specific Aerobic Endurance Training. Br. J. Sport. Med. 2002, 36, 218–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Clemente, F.M.; Soylu, Y.; Arslan, E.; Kilit, B.; Garrett, J.; van den Hoek, D.; Badicu, G.; Filipa Silva, A. Can High-Intensity Interval Training and Small-Sided Games Be Effective for Improving Physical Fitness after Detraining? A Parallel Study Design in Youth Male Soccer Players. PeerJ 2022, 10, e13514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Castillo-Rodríguez, A.; Cano-Cáceres, F.J.; Figueiredo, A.; Fernández-García, J.C. Train Like You Compete? Physical and Physiological Responses on Semi-Professional Soccer Players. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sensors 23 01299 g001 550
Figure 1. Distances covered to 5 ranges of speed in different SSG and competition match. Walking: distance covered between 0.1–6.9 km·h−1; Low-intensity running: distance covered between 7.0–12.9 km·h−1; Medium-intensity running: distance covered between 13–17.9 km·h−1; High-intensity running: distance covered between 18–20.9 km·h−1; Sprinting: distance covered >21 km·h−1. SSG-l: small-sided games large; SSG-m (small-sided games medium), SSG-s (small-sided games small). H1: First half; H2: Second half.
Figure 1. Distances covered to 5 ranges of speed in different SSG and competition match. Walking: distance covered between 0.1–6.9 km·h−1; Low-intensity running: distance covered between 7.0–12.9 km·h−1; Medium-intensity running: distance covered between 13–17.9 km·h−1; High-intensity running: distance covered between 18–20.9 km·h−1; Sprinting: distance covered >21 km·h−1. SSG-l: small-sided games large; SSG-m (small-sided games medium), SSG-s (small-sided games small). H1: First half; H2: Second half.
Sensors 23 01299 g001
Table
Table 1. Established characteristics of the three small-sided game formats (SSG-l = large, SSG-m = medium, SSG-s = small) and official matches.
Table 1. Established characteristics of the three small-sided game formats (SSG-l = large, SSG-m = medium, SSG-s = small) and official matches.
Small-Sided Game Format
VariablesOfficial MatchesSSG-lSSG-mSSG-s
Duration2 × 40 min8 min8 min8 min
Pitch size102 × 54 m75.3 × 39.9 m58.4 × 30.9 m33.8 × 17.9 m
Playing area5508 m23004.5 m21804.6 m2605 m2
Grid ratio1.9:11.9:11.9:11.9:1
Ratio per player250.4 m2250.4 m2150.4 m250.4 m2
Goalkeepersyesyesyesyes
RulesRules = soccer 11Rules = soccer 11
Coach giving ordersyesyesyesyes
Availability of balls yesyesyes
Table
Table 2. One-way ANOVA of the physiological responses on soccer players in different SSG and competition match a. The final column shows the regression coefficient between distance per minute and the physiological metrics.
Table 2. One-way ANOVA of the physiological responses on soccer players in different SSG and competition match a. The final column shows the regression coefficient between distance per minute and the physiological metrics.
SSG-s (n = 15)SSG-m (n = 15)SSG-l
(n = 15)		H1
(n = 15)		H2
(n = 15)		F (4,65)pη2Effect Size QualityR2 with TD/Min
HRmin (%HRmax)53 ± 654 ± 755 ± 748 ± 1448 ± 161.4970.2150.15Small-
HRmean (%HRmax)73 ± 778 ± 777 ± 875 ± 373 ± 51.6270.1790.16Small0.160 **
HRmax (%HRmax)88 ± 890 ± 891 ± 896 ± 893 ± 91.7820.1440.16Small0.076 *
HR151 ± 3331 ± 3333 ± 3143 ± 1455 ± 181.7860.1440.16Small0.146 **
HR235 ± 2433 ± 2228 ± 1840 ± 1034 ± 130.5660.6890.09Small-
HR310 ± 1422 ± 1623 ± 1411 ± 77 ± 8 a4.2940.0040.25Moderate0.192 **
HR44 ± 214 ± 714 ± 76 ± 34 ± 22.1180.0900.18Small0.167 **
a Data are showed as mean ± standard deviation (95% Confidence Interval). HRmin: minimum heart rate; HRmean: mean heart rate; HRmax: maximum heart rate. HR1: % of playing time spent <75%HRmax; HR2: % of playing time spent between 75–84%HRmax; HR3: % of playing time spent 85–89%HRmax; HR4: % of playing time spent >90%HRmax. SSG-l: Small-sided games large; SSG-m: Small-sided games medium; SSG-s: Small-sided games small; H1: First half; H2: Second half. a: Substantial difference vs. H1. Linear Regression coefficients (R2): * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.
Table
Table 3. One-way ANOVA of the physical responses on soccer players in different SSG and competition match.
Table 3. One-way ANOVA of the physical responses on soccer players in different SSG and competition match.
SSG-s
(n = 15)		SSG-m
(n = 15)		SSG-l
(n = 15)		H1
(n = 15)		H2
(n = 15)		F (4,65)pη2Effect Size Quality
TD/min (m/min)82 ± 12 all113 ± 13 a,e119 ± 17 a,d,e103 ± 11 a,c98 ± 8 a,b,c20.2370.0000.49Large
Vmax (km/h)18 ± 2 all24 ± 3 a,d26 ± 4 a29 ± 4 a,b28 ± 5 a21.4670.0000.50Large
TD (m)653 ± 95 d,e906 ± 101 d,e953 ± 138 d,e4255 ± 798 all2839 ± 744 all159.7460.0000.84Large
Walking (m)394 ± 26 d,e354 ± 38 d,e352 ± 53 d,e1935 ± 339 all1398 ± 461 all131.5230.0000.82Large
LIR (m)204 ± 75 d,e328 ± 87 d,e343 ± 101 d,e1339 ± 318 all829 ± 158 all111.8920.0000.80Large
MIR (m)50 ± 28 all157 ± 45 a,d,e169 ± 55 a,d,e633 ± 186 all383 ± 115 all77.6020.0000.76Large
HIR (m)5 ± 9 d,e46 ± 26 d,e43 ± 23 d,e180 ± 86 all110 ± 68 all27.8510.0000.56Large
Sprinting (m)0.4 ± 1.5 d,e24 ± 18 d,e47 ± 46 d,e168 ± 105 a,b,c121 ± 104 a,b,c15.8920.0000.44Large
Walking (%)62 ± 10 all40 ± 8 a38 ± 11 a,e46 ± 5 a49 ± 5 a,c18.0700.0000.47Large
LIR (%)30 ± 736 ± 735 ± 731 ± 330 ± 52.9240.0280.21Small
MIR (%)7 ± 3 all17 ± 4 a17 ± 4 a,e15 ± 2 a13 ± 2 a,c23.4740.0000.59Large
HIR (%)0.7 ± 1.2 all4.7 ± 2.1 a4.4 ± 2 a4.2 ± 1.4 a3.7 ± 1.7 a14.3060.0000.42Large
Sprinting (%)0.4 ± 0.2 c,d,e2.6 ± 1.94.6 ± 4.3 a4.0 ± 2.2 a4.2 ± 3.9 a6.2850.0000.30Moderate
Data are showed as mean ± standard deviation (95% Confidence Interval). TD: Total distance, Vmax: maximal speed. Walking: distance covered between 0.1–6.9 km·h−1; LIR: low-intensity running: distance covered between 7.0–12.9 km·h−1; MIR: medium-intensity running: distance covered between 13–17.9 km·h−1; HIR: high-intensity running distance covered between 18–20.9 km·h−1; Sprinting: distance covered >21 km·h−1. SSG-LSSG-l: small-sided games large; SSG-m (small-sided games medium), SSG-s (small-sided games small). H1: First half; H2: Second half. a: Significant difference vs. SSG-s; b: Significant difference vs. SSG-m; c: Significant difference vs. SSG-l; d: Significant difference vs. H1; e: Significant difference vs. H2; all: Significant difference vs. all situations.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Castillo-Rodríguez, A.; Durán-Salas, Á.; Giménez, J.V.; Onetti-Onetti, W.; Suárez-Arrones, L. The Influence of Pitch Dimensions during Small-Sided Games to Reach Match Physical and Physiological Demands on the Youth Soccer Players. Sensors 2023, 23, 1299. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23031299

AMA Style

Castillo-Rodríguez A, Durán-Salas Á, Giménez JV, Onetti-Onetti W, Suárez-Arrones L. The Influence of Pitch Dimensions during Small-Sided Games to Reach Match Physical and Physiological Demands on the Youth Soccer Players. Sensors. 2023; 23(3):1299. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23031299

Chicago/Turabian Style

Castillo-Rodríguez, Alfonso, Álvaro Durán-Salas, Jesús Vicente Giménez, Wanesa Onetti-Onetti, and Luis Suárez-Arrones. 2023. "The Influence of Pitch Dimensions during Small-Sided Games to Reach Match Physical and Physiological Demands on the Youth Soccer Players" Sensors 23, no. 3: 1299. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23031299

APA Style

Castillo-Rodríguez, A., Durán-Salas, Á., Giménez, J. V., Onetti-Onetti, W., & Suárez-Arrones, L. (2023). The Influence of Pitch Dimensions during Small-Sided Games to Reach Match Physical and Physiological Demands on the Youth Soccer Players. Sensors, 23(3), 1299. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23031299

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