ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of regular small-sided games (SSGreg) and SSGs combined with running drills (SSGcom) on players' internal and external loads. Eighteen young male soccer players (average age: 18.2 ± 0.5 years) participated in 3 vs. 3 and 4 vs. 4 games, under both SSGreg and SSGcom conditions. SSGreg bouts were played for 4 minutes without additional running drills, while SSGcom bouts consisted of 3 min 30 s SSG and 15 s running before and after the bout, making the duration of each bout 4 minutes. During all SSGs, measurements of heart rate (HR) responses as well as distances covered in four different speed zones - walking (WLK), low-intensity (LIR), moderate-intensity (MIR) and high-intensity running (HIR) - were recorded. Technical characteristics were monitored during the SSGs, and the rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and blood lactate (La-) responses were determined at the end of each SSG condition. Compared to the SSGreg in both 3 vs. 3 and 4 vs. 4 formats, the SSGcom condition resulted in higher La- and RPE responses (p < 0.05), greater distance covered at MIR and HIR speeds and greater total distance (p < 0.05). The results of this study show that replacing 30 s within the 4-min bouts of SSGs (both 3- and 4-a-side) by 2 x 15 s of running drills is effective in increasing internal (La- and RPE) and external loads (MIR and HIR) without a significant decrease in total passes and successful passes in young soccer players.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To investigate the effects of different bout durations on internal and external loads of young soccer players during different small-sided games (SSGs). METHODS: Fifteen young male soccer players (average age 17 ± 1 y) participated in 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3, and 4 vs 4 SSGs. All games lasted 12 min playing time in total, but each SSG format further consisted of 4 bout durations: continuous (CON: 1 bout × 12 min) or interval with short (SBD: 6 bouts × 2 min), medium (MBD: 3 bouts × 4 min), or long (LBD: 2 bouts × 6 min) bout durations. During the SSGs, heart-rate (HR) responses and distance covered in different speed zones (walking and low-intensity, moderate-intensity, and high-intensity running) were measured. Rating of perceived exertion (RPE) and blood lactate (La-) were determined at the end of each SSG. RESULTS: The SBD format elicited significantly lower %HRmax responses compared to LBD and CON in all formats (P < .05). The SBD format also showed significantly shorter distances covered in walking and greater distances covered in moderate-intensity running, as well as significantly greater total distance covered compared to LBD and CON in all formats (P < .05). In addition, LBD produced significantly lower La- and RPE responses than SBD and CON in all formats (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that coaches and sport scientists who want to achieve higher internal loads could use SBD and CON timing protocols, while those who want to achieve higher external loads might prefer to use SBD and MBD when planning all SSG formats.
