ANALYSIS OF MOTOR ACTIVITIES OF PROFESSIONAL
SOCCER PLAYERS
MARCIN ANDRZEJEWSKI,1,2 JAN CHMURA,3 BEATA PLUTA,1
1
Faculty of Methodology and Recreation, University School of Physical Education, Poznan, Poland;
2
KKS Lech Poznan´ S.A, Football Club, Poznan´, Poznan´, Poland; and 3Faculty of Players’
Motor Activity, University School of Physical Education, Wrocław, Poland
ABSTRACT
Andrzejewski, M, Chmura, J, Pluta, B, and Kasprzak, A. Analysis
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCywCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC1y0abggQZXdgGj2MwlZLeI= on 03/07/2022
of motor activities of professional soccer players. J Strength
Cond Res 26(6): 1481–1488, 2012—The objective of this
study was to determine the distance covered by professional
soccer players during matches with the use of the computer-
ized match analysis system Amisco ProÒ (version 1.0.2, Nice,
France). Kinematic examination included the specification of the
distance covered by 31 players participating in 4 matches in the
Union of European Football Association Cup competitions
during the 2008–2009 season. Data were analyzed based on
players’ positions on the pitch, changes in the players’ motor
activity intensity level, and match period (first or second half).
The results of statistical analysis revealed that the average total
distance covered by all players (n = 31) was 11,288 6 734 m.
With respect to the player’s position on the pitch, the
midfielders traveled the longest average distance (11,770 6
554 m) during the game. This was 3% longer than the distance
achieved by the attackers at 11,377 6 584 m, and 7% longer
than that achieved by the defenders 10,932 6 728 m. The
analysis of physical loads on soccer players during a match is
highly useful for training individualization. It provides a tool for
effective planning and for recording the loads on players, which
is an indispensable element of modern coaching.
KEY WORDS biomechanics, individualization, distance covered,
pitch position
INTRODUCTION
S
occer is one of the most complex and demanding
sports. The most remarkable achievements in
soccer depend on many closely interrelated factors.
It is a very dynamic game characterized by a large
number of direct duels that require excellent motor, technical,
Address correspondence to Marcin Andrzejewski, and rzejewski@awf.
poznan.pl.
26(6)/1481–1488
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Ó 2012 National Strength and Conditioning Association
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
AND ANDRZEJ KASPRZAK2
tactical, and mental preparation from the players (23).
Recently, much attention has been paid to the selection of
players possessing proper anthropometric and efficiency
profiles, thus providing for the possibility of systematic
workouts that allow players to achieve optimum perfor-
mance. The preparation of a player is frequently focused on
the improvement of technical or tactical skills at the expense
of developing motor abilities (2,3,17,22,27). Like many other
team sports, soccer also involves a number of various playing
positions with different physical requirements (2,18,25). To
compete at an elite level, soccer players are expected to
possess morphological and physiological characteristics that
are applicable both for the sport of soccer and specifically for
their playing position. Although significant correlations were
determined among soccer players’ body weight, muscle
mass, and work-rate profile, the relationship between other
anthropometric characteristics and work-rate profile was
found to be more complex (25).
The high level of endurance, weight, and speed require-
ments results in profound exposure of soccer skills from
the players during the game. This is why understanding the
structure of movement during the match is the first step on the
way toward the rational programming of speed and strength
training (10). During a match, players of the best European
teams cover a distance of about 9–13 km (4,5,11,18,19,25),
with an average intensity approximating the lactate threshold
[LT] (2,16,21). The biggest part of that distance is covered
by marching and running at low intensity (;8–9 km) and
by running at a very quick pace and sprinting (1.5–2.5 km)
(1,5,25). The distance covered by players during a soccer
match depends, among others, on the player’s biological
potential, training level, tactical assumptions, and match
formation. It should be emphasized that, because of very
frequent changes in physical activities during a match, the
covered distance does not only represent the form of work
performed by a player. Carling (7) indicates that in profes-
sional soccer only 1.2–2.4% of the total distance during
a match is covered by players in possession of the ball,
with particular players’ distances dependent on their pitch
positions. In comparison, Bangsbo (2) notes that the average
time of ball possession of world-class footballers is from 18 to
170 seconds. Apparently, team play effectiveness must
VOLUME 26 | NUMBER 6 | JUNE 2012 | 1481
 Distances Covered by Soccer Players
depend on the players’ performance without the ball during
the remaining 60 minutes of a match. Players’ endurance
training serves the dominant role during that time. Because of
the football game time, that is, 90 minutes, and a player’s
physical intensity level during a game (;70% V_ O2max),
a proper level of aerobic endurance enables a footballer to use
aerobic energy resources to a greater extent during a match.
Bangsbo (1) proves that 98% of energy used during a soccer
match is covered by aerobic metabolic processes, which
supply energy indispensable for running at a low and average
pace. A player also shows tolerance for cumulative fatigue
process arising because of physical exertion of high (above LT)
and very-high (sprints) intensities. A high level of endurance
capacity enables a player to develop a quicker playing pace,
which may be sustained during the entire game time.
The requirements for playing soccer with regard to
efficiency may be assessed on the basis of an analysis of
players’ motor behaviors during the match. In the last several
dozen years, the interest in monitoring and analysis of
match events in soccer has increased significantly (5,6,9,11,14,
18,24,28,31,33). Two pioneers who addressed the issue
related to players’ motion analysis were Reilly and Thomas
(24). The method they proposed consisted of defining the
number of steps performed by a player for each type of motor
activity (standing, walking, jogging, and sprinting), deter-
mining the average length of those steps, and then converting
the information into the distance covered by a player during
a match. Newer methods used to record players’ motor
activity were proposed by Hennig and Briehle (15) using a
global positioning system (GPS). This system allows the
recording of signals emitted by GPS transmitters located on
the Earth’s surface to a satellite in orbit. Currently, 2
computerized systems for match analysis are used: ProZoneÒ
(Leeds, United Kingdom), and Amisco ProÒ (Nice, France).
These systems analyze the course of sports rivalry at the level
of players’ motor activity and at their technical and tactical
levels. The practical value of such a sport competition
analysis is that it allows the user to determine the proper
choices for a particular player’s physical load, customized to
their nature, volume, and intensity (5,11). The system
produces the information necessary to shape specific motor
abilities of each player to meet the requirements of soccer
playing. Lack of such information may lead to overloading
or underloading of athletes’ bodies.
METHODS
Experimental Approach to the Problem
The main assumption of the experiment is that the use
of the Amisco ProÒ system allows an objective assessment
of the total distance covered by professional soccer players
in the analyzed matches. The player’s position on the pitch
during the game determines his distance coverage in different
intensity ranges. The analysis of professional soccer players’
kinematic parameters must also account for the situational
variable, that is, match period. It can be thus assumed that
the TM
1482 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
there can be statistically significant differences for 3 variables:
player’s position on the pitch, activity intensity range, and
match period.
Subjects
The study sample comprised 31 players in 3 outfield positions:
defenders (D, n = 15), midfielders (M, n = 10), and forwards
(F, n = 6). Four European Football Association (UEFA) Cup
matches from the 2008 to 2009 season were recorded.
The analysis involved the motor activities of the players
participating in the entire match, excluding the goalkeepers.
All analyzed UEFA Cup matches ended in a draw (4 matches
in total; 2 matches with a 2–2 score and 2 with a 1–1 score).
The study constituted an introductory stage of research into
the development of a player’s complete motor profile.
The authors have received a written consent from the
authorities of FC KKS Lech Poznan to use the figures
(provided by the club). The players were fully informed of all
experimental procedures before giving their informed consent
to participate in the study. To ensure team and player
confidentiality, all performance data were anonymized before
analysis. The study was conducted in compliance with the
Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the local ethics
committee (No. 339/02). The study protocol was also
approved by the Board of Ethics of University School of
Physical Education in Poznań.
Procedures
The study used one of the latest and most versatile computer
systems for match performance analysis, Amisco ProÒ. This
multiple-camera system tracked the movements of each
player over the course of the matches. The system provided
information on running speeds, covered distances, and the
occurrence rate for each player’s activity. Players’ movements
were tracked at a sampling rate of 25.0 Hz providing
approximately 2.5 million data points per match (8).
Simultaneously, a trained operator coded each technical
action with the ball. The workings of the AMISCO Pro
system have been described in more detail elsewhere (7,8,11).
Zubillaga et al. (34), and Randers et al. (20) have recently
evaluated the reliability and validity of AMISCO Pro for
quantifying displacement velocities during match-related
activities relative to data obtained using timing gates.
The present analysis was carried out by using 8
synchronized cameras placed on the roof of Municipal
Stadium in Poznań, Poland. These cameras recorded the
game in different pitch sectors as illustrated in Figure 1.
Signals gathered by the cameras were converted to digital
data and then fed into 4 computers used to conduct a match’s
performance analysis. Using the specially developed program
Amisco ProÒ in Athletic Mode, the collected data helped
determine the distance covered by the players and the
frequency of each form of motor activity from players in
different positions. The match analysis system also allowed
users to determine the distance covered by the players during
the match in 6 different motor activity intensity ranges:
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca-jscr.org

between the mean values,

Tukey’s honestly significant dif-
ference (HSD) test was applied.
The level of statistical signifi-
cance was set at p # 0.05. The
size of the distance covered by
players during a match in 6
different ranges of intensity:
standing, walking (V1), jogging
(V2), running (V3), fast running
(V4), high-speed running (V5),
and sprinting (V6) occurring
at 3 different positions on the
pitch is fairly compatible. The
strength of absolute compati-
bility is not large and amounts
to rICC = 0.5783. Statistical
analysis was carried out using
the STATISTICA program.

Figure 1. The recording ranges of the pitch parts by each of the 8 cameras.
0 # V1 , 11 km
h21 (standing, walking), 11 # V2 ,
14 km
h21 (jogging), 14 # V3 , 17 km
h21 (running), 17 #
V4 , 21 km
h21 (fast running), 21 # V5 , 24 km
h21
(high-speed running), and V6 $ 24 km
h21 (sprinting).
Statistical Analyses
All the parameters were checked to verify their conformity to
a normal distribution. The conformity evaluation was carried
out with the Lilliefors test (p , 0.01). For all the parameters,
the following descriptive statistics were calculated: arithmetic
mean, median, interquartile range, and SD. The figures show
the distances covered by the examined players depending on
their position on the pitch, activity intensity range, and match
period by means of chosen descriptive statistics.
A multifactorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to
compare the average covered distance for 3 variables: player’s
position on the pitch (D, M, and F), intensity ranges (V1, V2,
V3, V4, V5, and V6) and match period (first or second half ).
Initially, the full model was used to examine all interactions.
Statistically nonsignificant differences were removed from the
model, and the remaining differences were recalculated by
means of an ANOVA test. In the case of significant differences
RESULTS
The empirical data concerning
the distances covered by the
players of different tactical for-
mations in the assumed activity
intensity ranges in the first and
second halves of the match are
presented in Table 1. Table 2
shows significant differences in
the results of the ANOVA test
and post hoc Tukey’s HSD test.
The graphic characteristics of
the total distance covered by
the players participating in UEFA Cup competitions (n = 31)
based on their position on the pitch, intensity range, and
match period are presented in Figures 2–4.
Statistically significant differences were found for all 3
variables: position on the pitch (F = 5.034, p = 0.0136),
intensity range (F = 3848.10, p = 0.0000), and match period
(F = 6.63, p = 0.0152). Statistically significant differences were
found between intensity range and position on the pitch
(F = 4.23, p = 0.0000) and match period (F = 3.40,
p = 0.0059). A nonsignificant relationship was found between
the player’s position on the pitch and the match period
(F = 1.55, p = 0.2293).
The results of statistical analysis showed that the average
total distance covered by all the examined players (n = 31)
amounted to 11,288 6 734 m (Table 1). The longest
distance was covered by the players in the V1 intensity
range (62%), followed by V2 (15%), V3 (10%), V4 (8%), V5
(3%), and V6 (2%).
With regard to the player’s position on the pitch, the
longest distance was covered by the midfielders at 11,770 6
554 m, that is, 3% longer than the distance achieved by the
forwards (11,377 6 584 m) and 7% longer than the defenders

VOLUME 26 | NUMBER 6 | JUNE 2012 | 1483

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 1484

Distances Covered by Soccer Players

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
the

TABLE 1. Mean distances covered by UEFA cup players (n = 31) according to playing positions (defenders, D, n = 15; midfielders, M, n = 10; and forwards, F, n = 6),
ranges of velocities (V1 to V6) and game period (first and second halves).*†

Distances covered in different ranges of velocities in the first and second halves

Total Total
0 # V1 11 # V2 14 # V3 17 # V4 21 # V5 V6 $ IND IND
, 11 km
h21 , 14 km
h21 , 17 km
h21 , 21 km
h–1 , 24 km
h21 24 km
h21 VEL PER
TM

Positions First Second First Second First Second First Second First Second First Second First Second

D 3,434 3,547 742 793 496 536 414 416 142 155 133 125 5,360 5,572 10,932
(117) (144) (100) (154) (145) (188) (143) (154) (71) (80) (77) (88) (346) (448) (728)
M 3,415 3,471 942 962 636 770 531 544 166 156 85 93 5,774 5,996 11,770
(138) (91) (206) (151) (116) (181) (156) (124) (68) (42) (52) (59) (364) (309) (554)
F 3,449 3,623 800 694 596 505 496 469 178 191 200 177 5,719 5,659 11,377
(130) (127) (108) (168) (137) (160) (184) (91) (38) (45) (117) (27) (331) (325) (584)
Total 3,430 3,537 817 828 560 605 467 467 156 162 130 124 5,562 5,725
IND (122) (133) (165) (181) (145) (209) (159) (142) (64) (64) (86) (75) (392) (420)
POS
Total 6,968 1,646 1,166 935 319 255 11,288
IND (217) (310) (325) (268) (106) (138) (734)
PER
*IND VEL = independent of velocities; IND PER = independent of period; IND POS = independent of positions.
†Distances given in meters as mean (SD).

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca-jscr.org

the variables of the player’s

position on the pitch and act-
TABLE 2. Statistical results from ANOVA and Tukey’s significant difference criterion ivity intensity range. The dif-
with respect to 3 factors: playing positions (D, M, F), ranges of velocities (V1, V2, V3, ference between the 2 periods
V4, V5, and V6), and the game periods (first and second).*
of the match was statistically
Statistically significant significant (p = 0.0152) at 3%
Factor differences (p , 0.05) (Figure 4).
The relationships between
Playing positions M.D
Range of velocities V1 . V2 .V3 . V4 . V5, V6 the player’s position on the pitch
Periods Second . first and intensity range varied. In
Playing positions 3 range of velocities V2: M . D, F; V3: M . D; V6: F . M the V2 intensity range (jogging),
Range of velocities 3 periods V1: Second . first the differences between players’
*ANOVA = analysis of variance.
positions on the pitch proved
to be statistically significant
for M at 1,904 6 329 m, D at
1,534 6 209 m, and F at 1494 6
249 m. In V3 (running), M at
(10,932 6 728 m). The results revealed a statistically signifi- 1,405 6 258 m covered a statistically greater distance than did
cant difference only between the midfielders and the D at 1,031 6 313 m. However, in V6 (sprinting), F at 376 6
defenders as demonstrated in Figure 2. 104 m covered a statistically significant and greater distance in
The comparison of the distance covered by the players comparison with M, at 177 6 97 m. There were no statistically
examined in 6 intensity ranges showed statistically significant significant differences between the pitch positions and V1
differences among them with the exclusion of V5 and V6. The (standing, walking), V4 (fast running), and V5 (high-speed
distances covered by players in the 6 intensity ranges included running) (Table 2).
(in descending order): V1 (standing, walking) at 6,968 6 217 m; The relationship between motor activity intensity range
V2 (jogging) at 1,646 6 310 m; V3 (running) at 1,166 6 325 m; and match period showed that only in V1 (standing, walking)
V4 (running fast) at 935 6 268 m; V5 (high speed) at 319 6 did the players cover a statistically longer distance in the
106 m; and V6 (sprinting) at 255 6 138 m (Figure 3). second half of the match (3,537 6 133 m) in comparison to
The ANOVA test showed that the distance covered by their result achieved in the first half (3,430 6 122 m) as shown
the players in the second half of the match at 5,725 6 420 m in Table 1. There was no statistically significant differences in
was greater than in the first half 5,562 6 392 m, excluding the distance covered by the players between the first and the

Figure 3. Characteristics of the covered distance (meters) by the

players examined (n = 31) in 6 different activity intensity ranges: 0 #
Figure 2. Characteristics of the distance covered (meters) by the V1 , 11 km
h21 (standing, walking), 11 # V2 , 14 km
h21 (jogging),
examined players (n = 31) by their position on the pitch: defenders 14 # V3 , 17 km
h21 (running), 17 # V4 , 21 km
h21 (fast running),
(D, n = 15), midfielders (M, n = 10), and forwards (F, n = 6). 21 # V5 , 24 km
h21 (high-speed running), V6 $ 24 km
h21 (sprinting).

VOLUME 26 | NUMBER 6 | JUNE 2012 | 1485

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Distances Covered by Soccer Players
Figure 4. Distance in meters covered by the players (n = 31) in the first
and second halves of the analyzed matches.
second halves of the match for V2 (jogging), V3 (running), V4
(fats running), V5 (high-speed running), and V6 (sprinting) as
shown in Table 2.
DISCUSSION
During high-level sports matches, soccer players’ perfor-
mance of particular motor activities such as starts or technical
skills with the ball was assessed at rates of 1,000 (23), 1,300 (2),
1,400 (18) acts per game. These actions are used recursively
in different sequences and moments of the game. Changes of
activity depend on the player’s speed and direction of
movement necessary to perform particular technical ele-
ments and follow the opponent’s movements. The most
important forms of a soccer player’s motor activities include
starts from different positions, changes of direction, acceler-
ation, multiple runs over a distance of several dozen meters
(with and without the ball), technical actions with the ball,
marching, and trotting (13).
The results of this research show that the overall distance
covered by the players participating in the analyzed matches
of the UEFA Cup in the 2008–2009 season (11,288 6 734 m)
was similar to the values achieved by other authors. It has
been found that the average distance covered by a player
during a soccer match ranges from 8 to 12 km (3–5,15,
19,25,29). It is worth noting, however, that those studies
carried out match analysis using diverse methods of game
monitoring and evaluating of players at different levels. Di
Salvo et al. (11), among others, used the Amisco ProÒ system
in their analysis. They presented the results of an analysis of
300 players participating in 20 matches of the Spanish
Premier League and in 10 matches of the Champions League
in the 2002–2003 and 2003–2004 seasons. According to their
findings, the overall distance covered by a player averaged
11,393 6 1016 m, which is close to the results obtained in this
study (Table 1).
the
1486 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Adaptation training enables a player to adjust his abilities to
the real-game situation, depending on the requirements posed
by the opponent or on tactical assumptions of the team. In the
first half of the match, the teams try to identify the capabilities
of their opponents. Using their technical and tactical
preparation, among other options, they can develop effective,
optimal playing strategies and methods. This may be the
reason why the distance covered by the players in the first half
is shorter than the distance in the second half of the match.
The difference in the distance covered between the 2 halves of
a match was 163 m and was statistically significant (Figure 4).
These data, however, had not been confirmed by other
authors (5,11). Caution is to be necessarily exercised in
comparing recent data with reported results in the literature,
because different technologies and categorizations were
employed. Our results are similar to those previously
reported by Di Salvo et al. (11,12) and Zubillaga et al. (34).
In these studies, technologies and intensity categories were
the same as those used in the current investigation.
This study also attempted to determine the positions on the
pitch at which players covered the longest distances during
the game. On the basis of kinematic analysis carried out for
4 UEFA Cup matches, the greatest overall distance was
covered by the midfielders (11,770 6 554 m). A significantly
shorter distance was covered by the forwards and defenders,
at 11,377 6 584 and 10,932 6 728 m, respectively, as shown in
Figure 2. These values are close to the results obtained by
Di Salvo et al. (11), although the latter separated players’
positions on the pitch into 5 particular classifications: central
defenders, external defenders, central midfield players,
external midfield players, and forwards.
According to these authors, the longest distance was
covered by central midfield players at 12,027 6 625 m, which
was approximately 5% more than the team’s average. External
midfield players at the intensity level of running achieved an
average of 11,990 6 776 m. The shortest distance during a 90-
minute game was covered by central defenders at 10,627 6
893 m.
The intensity levels of soccer players during a match can be
broken down with respect to the percentage of the total
distance. For example, the results of one study included 24%
for marching, 36% for trotting, 20% for ‘‘tempo’’ or running
with submaximal intensity, 11% for sprinting, and 7% running
backwards (23). Each of the above forms of motor activity is
carried out on different stretches of the pitch with an
alternating frequency of occurrence. In a study of Danish
soccer players, Bangsbo (2) found that about 20% of the total
playing time was used for light running, whereas high-speed
running made up only 5.6% of the playing time and 14.1% of
the total distance covered.
The analysis of different forms of locomotion within the
distance covered during a game shows that most motor
activities are performed at low (trotting, marching, backward
movement) or submaximal (high-speed running) intensity.
Only a small part of the distance is covered with maximum
TM

intensity (sprint). Because of the acyclic and intermittent
character of the game, short periods are played at the
maximum intensity level (18).
The current state of knowledge is reaffirmed by the results
of this study. Characteristics of the distance covered in 6
separate intensity ranges explicitly showed that the longest
distance, regardless of the player’s position on the pitch, was
covered in V1 (standing, walking) at 6,968 6 217 m. The use of
this intensity level constitutes 62% of the total distance
covered during the match. In each subsequent intensity range,
the players covered shorter distances (Table 2).
During soccer competitions, high-intensity efforts in the
form of sprints occur on average every 90 seconds and last from
2 to 4 seconds. Sprints constitute from 1 to 11% of the total
distance covered by the players during the match, which covers
from 0.5 to 3% of effective playing time (26,30,32). In our
research, the players sprinted (V6 $ 24 km
h21) a distance of
255 6 138 m, which was only 2.3% of the total distance
covered during the game. A similar result, approximately 3%,
was achieved in a study of Di Salvo et al. (11).
As for the relationship between the player’s position on the
pitch and activity intensity range, this study demonstrates that
the midfield players covered a longer distance at lower speeds.
However, forward players predominate in sprint efforts in the
V5 and V6 intensity ranges. A slightly different observation
was made by Di Salvo et al. (11), who found that the longest
distance at the speed above 23 km
h21 at 446 6 161 m was
covered by external midfielders. The result for the forwards
was nearly 69 m longer than the result presented in our study.
When analyzing the distance covered by the players at
most speeds, it was found that the players cover similar
distances in both halves of the match. A statistically significant
distance was noted only for V1 (standing, walking), where
the distance covered by the players in the second half was
greater than that in the first half.
This study presents the characteristics of motor activities of
31 players participating in UEFA Cup competitions and
compares them with those of similar research conducted by
other authors. The research results were presented using
Amisco ProÒ, a modern computerized system for match
analysis. This particular tool, which provides valuable data
about players’ performance, becomes an important compo-
nent in the process of players’ preparation.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
The results of observation of different physical activity forms
of elite soccer players during championship matches reveal
a number of endurance and speed demands facing modern
soccer players and important training guidelines. The
knowledge of structure of players’ physical efforts during
matches can have a significant impact on the programming of
training loads and general improvement of the training
process. One of the most significant factors determining
the sports level of modern soccer players is their motor
preparation, which, in turn, profoundly affects their technical
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca-jscr.org
and tactical skills during a game. Even soccer players at the
highest technical level can make errors if the level of their
physical preparation is inadequate. The structure of training
loads in soccer must be closely related to the specificity of the
game. The profile of soccer players’ physical activities clearly
indicates the volume of their training loads and physical
efforts in real matches.
The data on the total distances covered by soccer players
during a championship match are crucial for soccer training
practice. Such data should be accounted for in the process of
planning of individual training units in an annual training
cycle.
During a 90-minute match, elite-level players cover
a distance of .10 km with an average intensity similar to
that of the blood LT. These data clearly emphasize the
importance of aerobic endurance in the physical preparation
of soccer players. In this case, the coaches of physical
preparation receive credible information connected with the
emphasis on the formation of aerobic capacity as a crucial
motor component of a soccer player. These presumptions are
largely possible to complete during the preparation periods at
each level of training with dominant loads of comprehensive
nature. The most frequently used means of all-round
preparation that could be applied in principle are overall
developing warm-ups, supplementary sports, and constant
and variable runs. Simplistic and task games directed among
other things at the formation of overall endurance through
the adequately suited technical and tactical presumptions of
a game are also of great importance. The range of intensity
during the training activities should oscillate within the limits
of individual physical loads of soccer players. The research
conducted indicates that these recommendations should
particularly relate to midfielders who cover the longest
distance of V2, V3, and V4 (Table 1) during a match.
Therefore, from the standpoint of the energy processes, the
workout should be interpreted as loads applied in the range
of supporting aerobic and mixed intensity.
In soccer, the anaerobic intensity plays an extremely
important role in the efforts of high and very-high intensities.
The most common mistake made by coaches during the
soccer players’ preparation process is the application of the
same speed load for all players during training. The results
presented in the article clearly demonstrate that the most
significant contribution to this type of efforts (V5 and V6)
occurs by forwards. In the analyzed matches, the attack
players cover twice the distance in sprints than do the
midfielders (V6 = 377 m for F and V6 = 178 m for M). This
information gives coaches the concrete and practical
knowledge in the field of programming the magnitude and
volume of loads for soccer players of different tactical
formations in the training unity aimed at the creation of motor
speed abilities.
The development of physical load profiles of soccer players
during a match is highly useful for training individualization
because it facilitates the planning and registration of training
VOLUME 26 | NUMBER 6 | JUNE 2012 | 1487
 Distances Covered by Soccer Players
loads for individual players. The knowledge of the profiles of
players’ physical activities during championship matches
enables the organization of soccer training in real-game
conditions.
In the conducted research related to motor activities of
professional soccer players, an original method of match
monitoring (Amisco Pro system) that enabled one to receive
a full description of players’ match behaviors on tridimen-
sional space was used. Amisco Pro systems of match data
collection currently exist in many leading soccer clubs,
including Real Madrid, FC Barcelona, and Arsenal. The study
also included variables related to the position on the field,
range of exercise intensity, and match duration. The research
results obtained and the literature review performed allow the
derivation of the conclusion that on the scientific field this
type of study sets an important direction in the development
of empirical research in the range of theory and practice of
team sport games.
REFERENCES
1. Bangsbo, J. The Physiology of Soccer—With Special Reference to Intense
Intermittent Exercise. Copenhagen, Denmark: August Krogh Institute
University of Copenhagen, 1993.
2. Bangsbo, J. The physiology of soccer: With special reference to
intense intermittent exercise. Acta Physiol Scand 151(Suppl. 619):
1–155, 1994.
3. Bangsbo, J and Krustrup, P. Physical demands and training of
top-class soccer players. In: Science and Football VI. T. Reilly and
F. Korkusuz, eds. New York, NY: Routledge, 2008. pp. 318–330.
4. Bangsbo, J, Norregaard, L, and Thorso, F. Activity profile of
competition soccer. Can J Sport Sci 16: 110–116, 1991.
5. Barros, R, Milton, S, Misuta, RP, Menezes, PJ, Figueroa, FA,
Moura, SA, Cunha, RA, and Neucimar, JL. Analysis of the distances
covered by first division Brazilian soccer players obtained with an
automatic tracking method. J Sports Sci Med 6: 233–242, 2007.
6. Bradley, PS, Di Mascio, M, Peart, D, Olsen, P, and Sheldon, BJ.
High-intensity activity profiles of elite soccer players at different
performance levels. J Strength Cond Res 24: 2343–2351, 2010.
7. Carling, C. Analysis of physical activity profiles when running with
the ball in a professional soccer team. J Sports Sci 28: 319–326, 2010.
8. Carling, C, Williams, AM, and Reilly, T. Handbook of Soccer Match
Analysis: A Systematic Approach to Improving Performance. Routledge,
United Kingdom: Abingdom, 2005.
9. Castagna, C, Impellizzeri, F, Cecchini, E, Rampinini, E, and
Alvarez, JC. Effects of intermittent-endurance fitness on match
performance in young male soccer players. J Strength Cond Res. 23:
1954–1959, 2009.
10. Chmura, J, Mleczko, M, Szyngiera, W, Andrzejewski, M,
Dargiewicz, R, Dybek, T, and Basiuk, W. Formy aktywności
ruchowej piłkarek podczas meczu. Sport Wyczynowy 5: 31–37, 2006.
11. Di Salvo, V, Baron, R, Tschan, H, Calderon Montero, FJ, Bachl, N,
and Pigozzi, F. Performance characteristics according to playing
position in elite soccer. Int J Sports Med 28: 222–227, 2007.
12. Di Salvo, V, Gregson, W, Atkinson, G, Tordoff, P, and Drust, B.
Analysis of high intensity activity in Premier League Soccer. Int J
Sport Med 30: 205–212, 2009.
13. Drust, B, Atkinson, G, and Reilly, T. Future perspectives in the
evaluation of the physiological demands of soccer. Sports Med 9:
783–805, 2007.
14. Ekblom, B. Applied physiology of soccer. Sports Med 3: 50–60, 1986.
the TM
1488 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
15. Hennig, E and Briehle, R. Game analysis by GPS satellite tracking of
soccer players. In: Book of Abstracts. Montreal, Canada: XI Congress
of the Canadian Society for Biomechanics, 2000. pp. 44.
16. Hoff, J and Helgerud, J. Endurance and strength training for soccer
players: Physiological considerations. Sports Med 34: 165–180,
2004.
17. Lago, C, Casais, L, Dominguez, E, and Sampaio, J. The effects of
situational variables on distance covered at various speeds in elite
soccer. Eur J Sport Sci 10: 103–109, 2010.
18. Mohr, M, Krustrup, P, and Bangsbo, J. Match performance of
high-standard soccer players with special reference to development
of fatigue. J Sports Sci 21: 519–528, 2003.
19. Rampinini, E, Bishop, D, Marcora, SM, Ferrari Bravo, D, Sassi, R,
and Impellizzeri, FM. Validity of simple field tests as indicators of
match-related physical performance in top-level professional soccer
players. Int J Sports Med 28: 228–235, 2007.
20. Randers, MB, Mujika, I, Hewitt, A, Satiesteban, J, Bischoff, R,
Solano, R, et al. Application of four different football match analysis
systems: A comparative study. J Sports Sci 28: 171–182, 2010.
21. Reilly, T. The physiological aspects of soccer. Boil Sport 11: 3–20,
1994.
22. Reilly, T. Motion analysis and physiological demands. In: Science
and Soccer. T. Reilly and A.M. Williams, eds. London, United
Kingdom: E & FN Spon, 2003. pp. 9–72.
23. Reilly, T. The Science of Training—Soccer: A Scientific Approach to
Developing Strength, Speed, and Endurance. New York, NY: Routledge,
2007.
24. Reilly, T and Thomas, V. A motion analysis of work rate in different
positional roles in professional football match-play. J Hum Mov Stud
2: 87–97, 1976.
25. Rienzi, E, Drust, B, Reilly, T, Carter, JEL, and Martin, A.
Investigation of anthropometric and work-rate profiles of elite South
American international players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 40:
162–169, 2000.
26. Spencer, M, Bishop, D, Dawson, B, and Goodman, C. Physiological
and metabolic responses of repeated-sprint activities. Sports Med 35:
1025–1044, 2005.
27. Stølen, T, Chamari, K, and Castagna, C. Physiology of soccer: An
update. Sports Med 35: 501–536, 2005.
28. Strøyer, J, Hansen, L, and Klausen, K. Physiological profile and
activity pattern of young soccer players during match play. Med Sci
Sport Exerc 36: 168–174, 2004.
29. Thatcher, R and Batterham, AM. Development and validation of
a sport-specific exercise protocol for elite youth soccer players.
J Sports Med Phys Fitness 44: 15–22, 2004.
30. Valquer, W, Barros, TL, and Sant’anna, M. High intensity motion
pattern analyses of Brazilian elite soccer players. In: IV World Congress
of Notational Analysis of Sport. F. Tavares, ed. Porto, Portugal:
University of Portugal, 1998. pp. 80.
31. Winkler, WA. A new approach to the video analysis of tactical
aspects of soccer. In: Science and Football. W. Spinks, T. Reilly,
A. Lees, K. David, and A. Murphy, eds. London, United Kingdom:
E & FN Spon, 1988. pp. 386–372.
32. Wisløff, U, Castagna, C, Helgerud, J, Jones, R, and Hoff, J. Strong
correlation of maximal squat strength with sprint performance and
vertical jump height in elite soccer players. Br J Sports Med 38:
285–288, 2004.
33. Withers, R, Maricic, Z, Wasilewski, S, and Kelly L. Match analysis of
Australian professional soccer players. J Hum Mov Stud 8: 159–176,
1982.
34. Zubillaga, A, Gorospe, G, Hernandez, A, and Blanco, A.
Comparative analysis of the high-intensity activity of soccer
players in top level competition. In: Science and Football VI. T. Reilly
and F. Korkusuz, eds. Routledge, United Kingdom: 2009. pp.
182–185.