Search

Technical performances of teams competing in the professional second divisions of England, Germany and France were analysed over five seasons in order to determine which factors influence the chances of promotion to the elite leagues. A total of 11,032 team-match observations were analysed via a series of logistical regressions. The results revealed that teams with an overworked defensive unit that were frequently asked to make blocks, clearances and goalkeeper saves would have significantly reduced chances of promotion. Conversely, set-plays and in particular taking advantage of penalty kick opportunities significantly increased the odds of promotion by 37%. In addition, scoring goals from corner kicks were also revealed to significantly enhance the odds of promotion by 35%. With regard to open play, creating chances in the form of assists and through balls were revealed to significantly increase the odds of promotion by 28% and 14%, respectively. These results, therefore, indicate that lower league teams with ambitions of achieving promotion to the elite level should adopt a strategy which consists of frequent penetrative passing that leads to chance creation. Furthermore, teams hoping to achieve promotion should look to improve their efficiency from penalty kicks and corner kick set-plays. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to examine the effects of high (HPBPT) and low percentage ball possession teams (LPBPT) on physical and technical profiles in elite soccer matches. Match performance data were collected from players in the English FA Premier League (n= 810) using a multiple-camera computerised tracking system. Physical indicators such as the total (10690 ± 996 vs 10778 ± 979 m; effect size [ES] = 0.11) and high-intensity running distance covered in matches (931 ± 299 vs 938 ± 311 m; ES = 0.13) did not differ between HPBPT and LPBPT. However, high-intensity running with ball possession in HPBPT was 31% higher (P< 0.01) than LPBPT (449 ± 266 vs 343 ± 236 m; ES = 0.42) but 22% lower without ball possession (423 ± 153 vs 539 ± 177 m; ES = 0.73). Players in HPBPT performed 44% more (P< 0.01) passes than those in LPBPT (35.3 ± 14.2 vs 24.6 ± 11.2; ES = 0.83). This trend was also evident (P< 0.05) for successful passes, received passes, touches per possession, shots, dribbles and final-third entries (ES range of 0.20–0.94). Central defenders of LPBPT covered 33% less (P< 0.01) high-intensity running with ball possession than central defenders of HPBPT. While fullbacks, attackers, central and wide midfielders of LPBPT covered more (P< 0.01) high-intensity running without and less with ball possession than their HPBPT counterparts (ES range of 0.91–1.23). Technical indicators such as total passes and passes received were higher (P< 0.01) across all positions in HPBPT than LPBPT (ES range of 0.82–1.52). The data demonstrate that percentage ball possession does not influence the overall activity profile of a team but impacts on the composition of high-intensity running efforts (with and without ball) and some technical elements of performance. Position-specific changes in physical and technical profiles were evident for teams employing different ball possession percentages and this information could aid training preparation. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The aim of this study was to compare the match performance and physical capacity of players in the top three competitive standards of English soccer. Match performance data were collected from players in the FA Premier League (n=190), Championship (n=155) and League 1 (n=366) using a multiple-camera system. In addition, a selection of players from the Premier League (n=56), Championship (n=61) and League 1 (n=32) performed the Yo-Yo intermittent endurance test level 2 (Yo-Yo IE2) to determine physical capacity. Players in League 1 and the Championship performed more (p<.01) high-intensity running than those in the Premier League (Effect Size [ES]: 0.4-1.0). Technical indicators such as pass completion, frequency of forward and total passes, balls received and average touches per possession were 4-39% higher (p<.01) in the Premier League compared to lower standards (ES: 0.3-0.6). Players also covered more (p<.05) high-intensity running when moving down (n=20) from the Premier League to the Championship (ES: 0.4) but not when players moved up (n=18) standards (ES: 0.2). Similar Yo-Yo IE2 test performances were observed in Premier League, Championship and League 1 players (ES: 0.2-0.3). Large magnitude relationships (p<.05) were observed between Yo-Yo IE2 test performances and the total and high-intensity running distance covered in both Championship (r=.56 and .64) and Premier League matches (r=.61 and .54). The data demonstrate that high-intensity running distance was greater in players at lower compared to higher competitive standards despite a similar physical capacity in a subsample of players in each standard. These findings could be associated with technical characteristics inherent to lower standards that require players to tax their physical capacity to a greater extent but additional research is still required to confirm these findings., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)