Weekly Training Load across a Standard Microcycle in a Sub-Elite Youth Football Academy: A Comparison between Starters and Non-Starters

Abstract

Compensatory training sessions have been highlighted as useful strategies to solve the differential weekly training load between the players’ starting status. However, the influence of the players’ starting status is still understudied in sub-elite youth football. Thus, the aim of this study was to compare the weekly training load on a standard microcycle in starters and non-starters of a sub-elite youth football academy. The weekly training load of 60 young sub-elite football players was monitored during a 6-week period using an 18 Hz global positioning system (GPS), 1 Hz telemetry heart rate, rating of perceived exertion (RPE), and total quality recovery (TQR). The total distance (TD) covered presented a significant difference between starters and non-starters with a moderate effect ( t = −2.38, Δ = −428.03 m, p = 0.018, d = 0.26). Training volume was higher in non-starters than in starter players (TD Starters = 5105.53 ± 1684.22 vs. TD Non-starters = 5533.56 ± 1549.26 m). Significant interactive effects were found between a player’s starting status, playing time, and session duration in overall training load variables for within (F = 140.46; η 2 = 0.85; p < 0.001) and between-subjects (F = 11.63 to 160.70; η 2 = 0.05 to 0.76; p < 0.001). The player’s starting status seems to only influence the training volume in sub-elite youth football, unless one considers the covariance of the playing time and session duration. Consequently, coaches should prioritize complementary training to equalize training volume and emphasize similar practice opportunities for non-starters. Future studies should evaluate the gap between training and match load, measuring the impact of recovery and compensatory sessions.

Tactical Knowledge by Decision Making and Motor Efficiency of Young Football Players in Different Playing Positions during a Three-a-Side Small-Sided Game

“…Finally, the sample considered three different age categories (i.e., U11, U13 and U15), which have different maturational and cognitive abilities due to the stages of development [ 67 , 68 , 69 ]. Future studies should measure decision making principles with players of the same age category or by carrying out a comparison between them [ 70 , 71 , 72 ].…”

Toward a New Conceptual Approach to “Intensity” in Soccer Player's Monitoring: A Narrative Review

“…During a soccer match, athletes performed 150-250 different actions, 1,100 changes of direction, and the typology of physical activity performed by each player changes every 4-6 seconds (29). Owing to the complexity of the soccer match demand, evaluating both internal and EL provides a holistic overview of the TL (5,28,54,85) due to the fact that 2 athletes performing the same EL could result in different IL and consequently in different training adaptation (46,86). In soccer, the duration of the training task is usually considered as volume, whereas training intensity has been described believed several indicators (both internal and external).…”

“…Hence, the use of HR alone is not appropriate to understand the intensity during HIT sessions. Also, RPE methods has been used to establish the intensity in HIT sessions despite this approach could provide insufficient and incomplete information in team sports due to the fact that it may be dependent on age, fitness, exerciseintensity, pleasure, and exercise typology (24,53,85). Other methods used to determine intensity in HIT refer to the speed (or power) associated with V Ȯ2 max (i.e., v/p V Ȯ2 max or maximal aerobic speed/power [MAS/MAP]) (14).…”

“…To date, the possibilities of directly measuring the neuromuscular response (i.e., internal intensity) during soccer-specific tasks performance is not possible. Only through GPS or inertial accelerometer it is possible to detect this response related to neuromuscular load such as accelerations, decelerations, and direction change indicators (79,85).…”

“…Several studies have evaluated the training workload in soccer measuring the external intensity through the most common microelectromechanical (MEMS) systems (e.g., global positioning system, local positioning system, and inertial measurement units) (81,87) and in particular through numerous metabolic and mechanical indicators (85). Usually, the intensity was measured by several EL indicators related to time (e.g., distance per minute, number and distance of accelerations and decelerations per minute, and high-speed running distance/time per minute) (87).…”