Purpose: To systematically describe and analyze the tracking systems, the variables, and the statistical methods used to evaluate the players and teams' tactical behavior in small-sided and conditioned games (SSCGs). Methods: A search was done in Web of Science, PubMed, Science Direct, and Scielo databases to identify manuscripts published between 2008 and 2019 that manipulated small-sided and conditioned games (SSCGs) and analyzed tactical behaviors of players and teams. Results: From 349 articles identified, 31 were selected for review. To collect positional data, the global positioning system (GPS), the local position measurement (LPM) system, and TACTO were identified as reliable tracking systems. Twenty-one positional variables were identified to evaluate tactical behaviors, grouped into five main categories: team balance, playing space, width and length of playing space, and interpersonal distance. Tactical behavior patterns were analyzed using approximate entropy, sample entropy, Shannon entropy, and patterns of coordination between players and teams were analyzed using relative phase and running correlation. Discussion: The tracking systems analyzed were reliable but revealed different advantages and disadvantages of their use. Authors should define the use of each tracking system based on their purpose and level of precision required for analysis. A great duplication was observed on the variables used with similar purposes of tactical analysis. The identification of the variables according to their purpose of analysis will allow a better understanding of their use in the future.

The aim of the study was to quantify the individual player area (IPA) that emerges during football matches at youth levels, considering different numerical relations and pitch zones. Two hundred and twenty-eight players, divided by U15, U17 and U19, participated in the study. Jonckheete-Terpstra and Kruskal Wallis nonparametric tests were used to compare the IPA according to variations in players' age, numerical relations and pitch zones considered for analysis. All ages and numerical relation results revealed the highest IPA in the zones closer to the goal and were lower in the middle of the pitch. For 3 × 3 to 10 × 10 numerical relations, the IPA was higher in the U15 and lower in the U17. The greater differences between the age groups concerned numerical relations of 6 × 6 to 10 × 10 (p ≤ 0.001). The effect size was moderate between the U15 and U17 in numerical relations of 8 × 8 to 10 × 10. Results suggest that the manipulation of IPA during training sessions should respect players' age and be adjusted considering the numerical relation and the tactical purpose of coaches.