Physical performance and technical-tactical aspects in 4 vs. 4 small-sided games across various field formats among professional soccer players

1Citations
Citations of this article
22Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This study assessed the impact of varying pitch dimensions during 4 vs. 4 small-sided games on both physiological performance and technical–tactical aspects among professional soccer players. The sample comprised eight (n= 8) male players from a Greek Superleague team, with an average age of 20 ± 1.5 years, body mass of 73.9 ± 6.4 kg, and stature of 179.4 ± 46cm. The players trained in 4 vs. 4 small-sided games with 1 goalkeeper, played in 4×5 min intervals with a 5 min rest period, across three playing formats: full pitch-half pitch-quarter pitch. In the small-sided games training, the players’ heart rate and blood lactate were measured in real-time, while both video and visual observation recorded their technical-tactical parameters. During the 4vs4 training in the quarter pith, the players’ blood lactate concentration ranged from 6.02 to 6.65mmol/l-1. Additionally, in 4 vs. 4 small-sided games in the half pitch the players’ blood lactate ranged from 8.24 to 9.42mmol/l-1, while their blood lactate concentration was measured as high as 9.65-11.28mmol/l-1 during the whole pitch games. In contrast, no differences were recorded in the players’ heart rate in any one of the Small-Sided-Games in the three training formats. Regarding the players technical-tactical parameters, the current study reported that the smaller the pitch dimension of the small-sided games the greater the amount of the players’ mistakes in passes accuracy, 1vs1, shots and goal-scored.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ispyrlidis, I., Gourgoulis, V., Mitrotasios, M., & Mantzouranis, N. (2024). Physical performance and technical-tactical aspects in 4 vs. 4 small-sided games across various field formats among professional soccer players. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 24(2), 482–487. https://doi.org/10.7752/jpes.2024.02059

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free