ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 lockdown challenged the training options of athletes worldwide, including players from the most popular sport globally, football/soccer. PURPOSE: The authors explored the training practices of football players worldwide during the COVID-19 lockdown. METHODS: Football players (N = 2482, 30% professional, 22% semipro, and 48% amateur) completed an online survey (May-July 2020) on their training practices before versus during lockdown (March-June 2020). Questions were related to training frequency and session duration, as well as training knowledge and attitudes. RESULTS: Before lockdown, more professional (87%) than semipro (67%) and amateur (65%) players trained ≥5 sessions/wk, but this proportion decreased during the lockdown to 55%, 35%, and 42%, respectively. Players (80%-87%) trained ≥60 minutes before lockdown, but this proportion decreased to 45% in professionals, 43% in amateurs, and 36% in semipros during lockdown. At home, more than two-thirds of players had training space (73%) and equipment (66%) for cardiorespiratory training, while availability of equipment for technical and strength training was <50% during lockdown. Interactions between coach/trainer and player were more frequent (ie, daily) among professional (27%) than amateur (11%) and semipro (17%) players. Training load monitoring, albeit limited, was mostly performed by fitness coaches, more so with professionals (35%) than amateurs (13%) and semipros (17%). The players' training knowledge and attitudes/beliefs toward training were relatively modest (50%-59%). CONCLUSION: COVID-19 lockdown negatively affected training practices of football players worldwide, especially amateurs and semipros, for example, in training frequency, duration, intensity, technical, recovery, and other fitness training and coaching-related aspects. During lockdown-like situations, players should be monitored closely and provided appropriate support to facilitate their training.
ABSTRACT
Ramadan intermittent fasting during the COVID-19 lockdown (RIFL) may present unique demands. We investigated training practices (i.e., training load and training times) of athletes, using pre-defined survey criteria/questions, during the 'first' COVID-19 lockdown, comparing RIFL to lockdown-alone (LD) in Muslim athletes. Specifically, a within-subject, survey-based study saw athletes (n = 5,529; from 110 countries/territories) training practices (comparing RIFL to LD) explored by comparative variables of: sex; age; continent; athlete classification (e.g., world-class); sport classification (e.g., endurance); athlete status (e.g., professional); and level of training knowledge and beliefs/attitudes (ranked as: good/moderate/poor). During RIFL (compared to LD), athlete perceptions (ranges presented given variety of comparative variables) of their training load decreased (46-62%), were maintained (31-48%) or increased (2-13%). Decreases (≥ 5%, p < 0.05) affected more athletes aged 30-39 years than those 18-29 years (60 vs 55%); more national than international athletes (59 vs 51%); more team sports than precision sports (59 vs 46%); more North American than European athletes (62 vs 53%); more semi-professional than professional athletes (60 vs 54%); more athletes who rated their beliefs/attitudes 'good' compared to 'poor' and 'moderate' (61 vs 54 and 53%, respectively); and more athletes with 'moderate' than 'poor' knowledge (58 vs 53%). During RIFL, athletes had different strategies for training times, with 13-29% training twice a day (i.e., afternoon and night), 12-26% at night only, and 18-36% in the afternoon only, with ranges depending on the comparative variables. Training loads and activities were altered negatively during RIFL compared to LD. It would be prudent for decision-makers responsible for RIFL athletes to develop programs to support athletes during such challenges.