Optimizing The Use of Soccer Drills For Physiological Development
Optimizing The Use of Soccer Drills For Physiological Development
Optimizing The Use of Soccer Drills For Physiological Development
Development
Thomas Little, PhD
Sheffield Wednesday FC, Sheffield, United Kingdom; and Sport Science Department, Derby University, Derby,
United Kingdom
SUMMARY endurance capacities. Such soccer drills several advantages over more generic
contain many of the elements of soccer conditioning methods, such as running
USING SOCCER DRILLS FOR
match play, such as passing, dribbling without a ball. Motivation of the
CONDITIONING HAS
skills, and scoring, but typically involve players is improved when soccer and
CONSIDERABLE BENEFITS.
reduced player numbers and/or mod- competition are involved (4). Also,
HOWEVER, THE PRACTICALITIES more similar movement types and
ified rules. The use of soccer drills
OF CONDUCTING SUCH for physiological development has patterns in soccer drills may also lead
SESSIONS ARE MORE recently gained increasing popularity, to a greater transfer to match specific
CHALLENGING THAN with support from scientific literature fitness. Enhanced movement efficiency
NON–SOCCER-SPECIFIC (13,15,28) and empirical evidence from is particularly a key for unorthodox
CONDITIONING METHODS. THIS successful teams (32). It has been forms of locomotion, such as side and
ARTICLE EXAMINES FACTORS demonstrated that several soccer drills backward movements, which are fre-
THAT AFFECT THE PHYSICAL have the potential to elicit intensities quently performed in soccer drills (26).
NATURE OF SOCCER DRILLS AND suitable for developing soccer endur- Furthermore, the metabolic conse-
PROVIDES GUIDANCE ON HOW TO ance at elite and recreational levels (20) quences of intermittent exercise, as
OPTIMIZE TRAINING STRUCTURE and in both sexes (21). Furthermore, used in soccer drills and competition,
WHEN USING SOCCER DRILLS training programs involving soccer have been shown to be different from
FOR PHYSIOLOGICAL drills have been shown to be equally continuous exercise at the same aver-
DEVELOPMENT. effective in improving physiological age intensity (9).
factors important to soccer perfor- Despite these significant benefits, ge-
mance as generic aerobic training neric physical training is still prevalent
INTRODUCTION (15,28). The voluntary nature of move- at all levels of the sport. This may be in
hysiological development plays ment during soccer drills meant that part due to the greater difficulty in
Copyright Ó National Strength and Conditioning Association Strength and Conditioning Journal | www.nsca-lift.org 67
Use of Soccer Drills for Physiological Development
Lactate 80–90 Quite 3–6 30–60 6–30 min 1–8 ,1 min 535 (7,18,19,25,28)
threshold hard rest
636 (18,19,25)
737 (6)
838 (18,19,30)
Vo2max 90–95 Stressful 6–12 12–35 3–6 min 4–8 0.5–1 rest 333 (2,18,20,25)
ratio
434 (14,18,19,28)
Anaerobic .85 Maximal .10 4–16 20 s to 2–4 sets 1–4 rest 232 (1,19,27)
3 min of 4–8 ratio
333 (17)
possess
%HR = percent heart rate; RPE = rating of perceived exertion; Reps = repetitions.
reported that coach encouragement providing encouragement, using a play is often disrupted and does not
was the dominant variable on playing competitive playing structure, and flow across the pitch quickly. Despite
intensity, when examining the effects providing feedback to the players this concern, relative intensities have
of varying pitch size, player numbers, about intensity (8). been reported to be similar between
and coach encouragement. Therefore, A factor that can influence soccer drill amateur and professional players dur-
coaches should aim to maximize intensity that cannot be controlled by ing the same soccer drills (2,20,25,28).
motivational techniques when high the coach is the standard of the players. Table 4 shows intensities of soccer
training intensities are required. Fac- Players of low technical ability may not drills reported in the literature with
tors that can be used to enhance be able to produce high training details of the aforementioned factors
motivation include a coaching staff intensities during soccer drills because that can influence intensity.
70
Soccer drill parameters and intensities reported in the literature
Subject Lactate, VO2mL
Drill Reference Pitch size Duration standard Motivation %HRmax mmol/L RPE (20points) kg21min21
2 versus (27) Not reported 4 3 1 min, Professional Coach ~90–95% 11.9 — —
2 game 1 min rest encourage
(1) 30 3 20 m 3 3 1.30 min, National youth Unknown 84 6 5.0 8.1 6 2.7 16.2 6 1.1 —
1.30 min rest
(18) 30 3 20 yd 4 3 2 min, Professional Coach 90.8 6 1.7 9.6 6 1.0 16.3 6 0.9 —
2 min rest encourage
(19) 30 3 20 yd 88.9 6 1.2
(29) 30 3 20 m 2 3 1.30 min, National youth Coach 83.7 6 1.44 — 15.5 6 0.59 —
90 s rest encourage
(25) 25 3 15 m 3 3 4 min, Amateur Coach 90.5 6 2.3 6.3 6 1.5 8.4 6 0.4 —
3 min active encourage (10 points)
recovery
youth
(18) 50 3 30 yd 5 3 3.30 min, English Coach 90.2 6 2.1 9.5 6 1.1 15.3 6 0.7 —
2 min rest professional encourage
(19) 40 3 30 yd 4 3 4 min, 90.1 6 1.5
1.30 min rest
(20) Not reported — Amateur Unknown — — — 82
(21) Not reported 4 3 5 min Amateur Unknown 85.7 4.0 6 1.2 — 73.6
females
(28) 30 3 20 m 3 3 4 min, Amateur Coach 89.4 6 1.8 5.5 6 1.8 7.9 6 0.5 —
3 min active encourage (10 points)
recovery
4 versus 4 goal (1) 30 3 20 m 3 3 6 min, National Unknown 70 6 9.0 2.6 6 1.7 13.3 6 0.9 —
support 1.30 min rest youth
4 versus 4 side (14) 50 3 40 m 2 3 4 min, Norwegian Coach 91.3 — — —
support 3 min active professional encourage
rest
5 versus (28) Unknown 6 3 4 min, Professional Coach 85–90 12.7–13.5 — —
5 game 3 min jogging youth encourage
(18) 55 3 30 yd 3 3 5 min, English Coach 89.3 6 2.5 7.9 6 1.7 14.3 6 1.5 —
1.30 min rest professional encourage
71
Table 4
72
(continued)
Subject Lactate, VO2mL
Drill Reference Pitch size Duration standard Motivation %HRmax mmol/L RPE (20points) kg21min21
1 versus (22) 5 3 10 m 3 min, Professional Unknown 86.0 — — —
1 switch 12 min rest youth
10 3 15 m 88.0
15 3 20 m 89.0
25 3 30 m 84.8
(17) 40 3 30 yd 5 3 2 min, English Coach 90.4 6 1.9 10.4 6 1.2 16.5 6 1.0 —
2 min rest professional encourage
4 versus (22) 20 3 25 m 3 min, Professional Unknown 72.0 — — —
4 switch 12 min rest youth
25 3 30 m 78.5
5 versus 30 3 35 m 77.3
5 switch
25 3 30 m Unknown 75.7 — — —
30 3 35 m 79.5
35 3 40 m 80.2
4 versus (30) 25 3 25 m 4 3 5 min, Professional Coach — ;6–8 — —
4 possession 3 min rest encourage
Use of Soccer Drills for Physiological Development
size also affect how many teams are a-side and the other 2 teams playing fitness training. Using soccer drills for
formed. If more than 2 teams are a possession game, multiples of 6 reps conditioning has key advantages when
formed, multiple drills have to be set should be administered so that each compared with generic physical train-
up where teams play simultaneously on team plays all the opposition teams on ing, such as enhanced motivation and
different pitches. In addition, the both drills. The effect of a competitive greater transfer to match specific
number of goalkeepers and goalposts structure on repetition numbers often fitness. However, their utilization
influences what type of drills can be requires that repetition durations are can present a challenge in producing
used. Possession drills without goal- manipulated from what are typically optimal work intensities and in deter-
keepers can be used in scenarios used to produce the appropriate train- mining appropriate training structures.
where there are insufficient goalkeepers/ ing load. When conditioning, training Information within this article should
goalposts for the number of pitches load must always remain the priority, aid coaches in choosing and organizing
needed. Once the drills that suit the and therefore, a competitive structure soccer drills and training structures for
training circumstances have been iden- should not be used if it interferes too physiological development.
tified, the coach must select those that much with the appropriate repetition
have the potential to produce the duration. Thomas Little
desired work intensities. The coach Soccer drills allow simultaneous is a conditioning
must then select appropriate drill physical and technical development. coach for Sheffield
parameters, such as pitch size and Therefore, when possible, the soccer Wednesday FC
rules, to produce the desired intensity. drills used should contain the tactic- and lectures at
The number of teams and different s/technical elements desired by the Derby University.
drills can affect how many reps are coach. Normal small-sided games are
performed, if a competitive structure is generally desirable because they
to be used. A competitive structure closely replicate the demand of match
involves all teams playing each other play. Possession drills are often used if
an equal number of times. Such the coach wants to emphasize pres- REFERENCES
1. Aroso J, Rebelo AN, and Gomes-Pereira J.
a structure can aid motivation levels surizing opponents or maintaining
Physiological impact of selected game-
by increasing competition and placing possession of the ball. Figure 1 illus- related exercises. J Sports Sci 22: 522,
increased significance on the results. trates the decision process a coach 2004.
For example, if there are 4 teams, the must use to produce the correct 2. Balsom P. Precision Football. Kempele,
number of reps would be multiples of 3. training parameters when using soccer Finland: Polar, 1999. pp. 23–41.
However, if different types of drills are drills for conditioning.
3. Bangsbo J. The physiology of soccer—with
used, a competitive structure would special reference to intense intermittent
require that all teams play each other CONCLUSIONS exercise. Acta Physiol Scand Suppl 619:
an equal amount of times and that each Recent evidence has supported the 1–155, 1994.
team plays the same amount of the potential of using soccer drills to train 4. Bangsbo J. Fitness Training in Football: A
different soccer drills. For example, if physical capacities of soccer players Scientific Approach. Bagsvaerd, Denmark:
there were 4 teams with 2 playing 3- and thus provide simultaneous skill and HO+Storm, 1995. pp. 101–221.
5. Bompa TO. Periodization: Theory and 18. Little T and Williams AG. Suitability of soccer soccer players. J Sports Sci 22: 562,
Methodology of Training (4th ed). Toronto, training drills for endurance training. 2004.
Ontario: Human Kinetics Publishers, 1999. J Strength Cond Res 20: 16–319, 2006. 31. Stolen T, Chamari K, Castagna C, and
pp. 358. 19. Little T and Williams AG. Measures of Wisløff E. Physiology of soccer: an update.
6. Capranica L, Tessitore A, Guidetti L, and exercise intensity during soccer training Sports Med 35: 501–536, 2005.
Figura F. Heart rate and match analysis in drills with professional footballers. 32. Strøyer J, Hansen L, and Hansen K.
pre-pubescent soccer players. J Sports Sci J Strength Cond Res 21: 367–371, 2007. Physiological profile and activity pattern of
19: 379–384, 2001. 20. Maclaren D, Davids J, Isokawa M, Mellor S, young soccer players during match play.
and Reilly T. Physiological strain in 4-a-side Med Sci Sports Exerc 36: 168–174, 2004.
7. Castagna C, Belardinelli R, and Abt G. The
soccer. In: Science and Football. Reilly T, 33. Strudwick T and Reilly T. Work-rate profiles
VO 2 and heart rate response to training
Lees A, Davids K, and Murphy WJ, eds. of elite Premier League football players.
with a ball in youth soccer players. J Sports
London, United Kingdom: E. & F. N. Spon, Insight: FA Coaches Assoc J 4: 28–29,
Sci 22: 532–533, 2004.
1998. pp. 76–80. 2001.
8. Couttes A. Use of skill-based games in
21. Miles A, Maclaren D, Reilly T, and 34. Verheijen R. Periodisation in football:
fitness development for team sports. Yamanaka K. An analysis of physiological preparing the Korean National Team for the
Sports Coach 24: 18–19, 2002. strain in four-a-side women’s soccer. In: 2002 World Cup. Insight: FA Coaches
9. Drust B, Reilly T, and Cable NT. Science and Football II. Reilly T, Clarys J, Assoc J 6: 30–34, 2003.
Physiological responses to laboratory- Stibbe A, eds. London, United Kingdom:
E & FN Spon, 1993. pp. 140–145. 35. Wilson D. The physiological basis of speed
based soccer-specific intermittent and
endurance. Insight: FA Coaches Assoc J
continuous exercise. J Sports Sci 18: 885– 22. Owen A, Twist C, and Ford P. Small-sided 4: 36–37, 2001.
892, 2000. games: the physiological and technical
effect of altering pitch size and player 36. Wisloff U, Helgerud J, and Hoff J. Strength
10. Gabbett TJ. Training injuries in rugby and endurance of elite soccer players.
numbers. Insight: FA Coaches Assoc J
league: an evaluation of skill-based Med Sci Sports Exerc 30: 462–467, 1998.
7: 50–53, 2004.
conditioning games. J Strength Cond Res
16: 236–241, 2002. 23. Platt D, Maxwell A, Horn R, Williams M, and
Reilly T. Physiological and technical
11. Grant A, Williams M, Dodd R, and
analysis of 3 v 3 and 5 v 5 youth football
Johnson S. Physiological and technical matches. Insight: FA Coaches Assoc J 4:
analysis of 11 v 11 and 8 v 8 youth football 23–24, 2001.
matches. Insight: FA Coaches Assoc J 2:
24. Rampinini A, Sassi A, and Impellizzeri FM.
29–30, 1999.
Reliability of heart rate recorded during
12. Grant A, Williams M, Dodd R, and soccer training. In: Fifth World Congress of
Johnson S. Technical demands of 7v7 and Science and Football. Reilly T, ed. Madrid,
11v11 youth football matches. Insight: FA Spain: Gymnos, 2003. pp. 175.
Coaches Assoc J 4: 26–28, 1999. 25. Rampinini E, Impellizzeri FM, Castagna C,
13. Helgerud J, Engen LC, Wisloff U, and Abt G, Chamari K, Sassi A, and
Hoff J. Aerobic endurance training Marcora SM. Factors influencing
improves soccer performance. Med physiological responses to small-sided
Sci Sports Exerc 33: 1925–1931, 2001. soccer games. J Sports Sci 25: 659–666,
2007.
14. Hoff J and Helgerud J. Endurance and
strength training for soccer players. 26. Reilly T and Ball D. The net physiological
cost of dribbling a soccer ball. Res Q Exerc
Physiological considerations. Sports Med
Sport 55: 267–271, 1884.
34: 165–180, 2004.
27. Reilly T and Bangsbo J. Anaerobic and
15. Impellizzeri FM, Marcora SM, Castagna C,
aerobic training. In: Training in Sport:
Reilly T, Sassi A, Iaia FM, and Rampinini E.
Applying Sport Science. Elliott B, ed.
Physiological and performance effects of
Chichester, United Kingdom: Wiley, 1998.
generic versus specific aerobic training pp. 351–409.
in soccer players. Int J Sports Med 27:
28. Reilly T and White C. Small-sided games as
483–492, 2006.
an alternative to interval-training for soccer
16. Impellizzeri FM, Rampinini E, and players. J Sports Sci 22: 559, 2004.
Marcora SM. Physiological assessment of
29. Sampaio J, Garcia G, Mac xãs V, _Ibáñez SJ,
aerobic training in soccer. J Sports Sci 23:
Abrantes C, and Caixinha P. Heart rate and
583–592, 2005. perceptual responses to 2x2 and 3x3
17. Little T. Physiology of professional soccer small-sided youth soccer games.
training with particular reference to the use J Sports Sci Med 6(Suppl 10): 121–122,
of soccer drill for physiological 2007.
development [PhD thesis, Staffordshire 30. Sassi R, Reilly T, and Impellizzeri F. A
University, Stoke on Trent, United comparison of small sided games and
Kingdom]. 2006. interval training in elite professional