UKSCA: Case Study

U18 Football Player

Chris Hattersley MSc, CSCS, CESemail: hattersley4@hotmail.co.uk

Twitter: @hattersley4

The Athlete

• 17 year old central defender completing a 2 year scholarship.

• 12 months S & C experience.

• Dates chosen after pre-season during his first year.

• Passed medical screening and has had no major injuries.

Needs Analysis – Game Demands

• 10-13km TD, 2-3km HID (>15km/h) 1-2% in possession of the ball (Williams, 2013).

• 100’s of changes of direction / repeated inefficient modes of locomotion, highlights the need for sport specific conditioning.

• 30-50% of a game being carried out at >85% maximum heart rate (Akubat, & Abt, 2011).

• VO2max 55-65ml-kg-min. After this level has been achieved, sport specific measures of fitness become a more important indicator of performance (e.g. Yo-Yo Test) (Wells et al 2012) .

Needs Analysis – Kinetics / Kinematics

• High levels of strength and RFD in both eccentric and concentric actions .• Need to be efficient in the sagittal, frontal and transverse planes.

(Comfort & Abrahamson, 2010).

Directions of Movement Linear, lateral, vertical. Usually unilateral horizontally, bilateral

vertically.

Region of Force Production Triple flexed – triple extension (athletic position) unilateral &

bilateral

Peak Forces 6210 (N)

Rate & Time of Force Production <300msc

Types of muscular contraction Eccentric, concentric, ballistic, cyclical, SSC.

Needs Analysis – Injury Risk• 87% of injuries occur to the lower limb, most common hamstring strains,

ankle sprains and knee ligament injuries (Woods, Hawkins, Hulse, & Hodson, 2002).

• Previous injury is one of the key factors predisposing players to subsequent injury, with 25% being repeat injuries (Arnason et al, 2003)

• Screening should focus particularly on lower limb alignment, range of motion and lumbo-pelvic hip complex (LPHC) function.

• Eccentric hamstring exercises and ankle proprioception important (Junge & Dvorak, 2004).

Needs Analysis Athlete – Physical Characteristics

Yo-Yo

VO2 Max

Speed

CMJ

Agility

FMS

Body Fat %

Lean Muscle Mass

Upper Body Strength

Lower Body Strength

0

1

2

3

Player 1

3 = above average 2= average 1= below average

Needs Analysis ConclusionsMain Area of Focus Slight Improvement

NeededMaintain

Increase lean muscle mass (cross sectional area)

Speed Skinfolds

Increase whole body strength.

Agility VO2 Max

Power

Anaerobic capacity / Repeated sprint ability

Functional movement , SL stability, glute activation

The Programme• 3 month block which consists of two 6 week meso-cycles that run

alongside the technical programme.

Programme Rationale• First block – Hypertrophy

• Second block – Max Strength

• 2-3 complementary biomotor abilities are targeted to reduce any interference effects (e.g. AMPK – Mtor Signalling). (Gamble, 2013)

• Logical sequencing of physical qualities with each phase designed to ‘potentiate’ the next. (Siff, 2000).

• Non-linear periodisation utilised to prevent accumulation of fatigue. (Bompa & Haff, 2009)

Meso-cycle Conditioning Programme• Focus on developing RSA through sport specific running drills while maintaining

aerobic conditioning with SSG’s. • Speed / plyo work included in warm up.

Meso-cycle Physical Loading Analysis

HR’sRPE

GPSGPS

Meso-cycle Strength Programme

Meso-cycle Strength Programme

• Intensity has inverse relationship with fitness work, when one is high the other is low.

• Emphasis on multi-joint movements at 85-100% 5RM (Cardinale, Newton, & Nosaka, 2011)

• Large amount of muscle mass activated, high amounts of tension, moderate-high volume load. (Schoenfeld, 2010)

• Along with this rest periods of 2-3 mins promotes the hypertrophy of FT fibres due to repeated high force efforts stimulating high threshold MU’s. (Cardinale, Newton, & Nosaka, 2011)

*Endocrine system is still developing.

Meso-cycle Strength Analysis

Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 60

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

75

80

85

90

95

100

105

Volume Load & Training Intensities

VL (Kg) Day 1VL (Kg) Day 2VL (Kg) Day 3Training Intensity (%5RM)

Volu

me

Load

(Kg)

% 5

RM

Programme Analysis – Micro-cycle• Training logically structured. E.g. no weight training on heavy fitness day

• Training with high levels of residual fatigue is placed at the start of the week. E.g heavy eccentric strength exercises.

• A specific conditioning session takes place on a Tuesday, rest tech / tac drills.

• Volume is reduced Thursday & Friday to optimise physical readiness for the weekend game (Williams, 2013).

Micro-cycle StructureHEAVY MODERATE LIGHT EASY

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Gym

- Full body- Heavy

loading / high eccentric demand

-N/A - High volume load, lower body emphasis.

-Upper body session

- N/A - N/A - N/A

Training Workload

- Light

session, technical focus.

-Double session, fitness in afternoon.

- N/A

- Moderate

session, physical workload through SSG.

- Light session,

match preparation.

- GAME

- Recovery

at home

Speed / Warm Up

- Mobility / activation focus

- Strides at end of warm up

- Acceleration- Assisted /

resisted sprints

- Power exercises

- N/A

- Co-ordination / Footwork

- Position specific drills

- Low level plyo’s

-Change of direction-Reactive agility

- N/A - N/A

Other

- Injury Prevention

- Injury Prevention

- Hydration

- Injury Prevention

- Injury Prevention

- Hydration

Micro-cycle Physical Loading

HR’s RPE

GPS GPS

Injury Prevention - ScreeningDysfunction Lengthen

(Release & Stretch)Strengthen(Activate & Integrate)

Valgus Knee (R)

- Lateral gastrocnemius- Adductors- Tensor fascia latae- Biceps femoris

-Gluteus medius-Gluteus maximus-Vastus medialis oblique- Integration of lateral sub system

Inhibited Glute Activation

-Hip flexors-Quadriceps

-Glute medius-Glute maximus

Tight Hamstrings -Hamstrings N/A

Tight Quadriceps -Quadriceps N/A

Injury Prevention Programme

Interaction with staff & players

• With technical coaches on a daily basis to plan training load.

• End stage rehab or movement screening with physios.

• Daily presentation of data to players, reports every 6 weeks, open door policy.

EvaluationPerformance Facet Performance Outcomes Before 3 month block After 3 month block

Fitness Measurement

PO1) Body Mass: T1) 76kg ET1) 80kg

PO2) Skinfolds: T2) 22.8 ET2) 22.8

PO3) Acceleration – 20 meter sprint T3) 3.02 sec ET3) 2.99 sec

PO4) High Speed Running Capacity – YIRT2: T4) 790m ET4) 920m

PO5) VO2 Max: T5) 68 ml.kg.min ET5) N / A

PO6) Agility – Arrowhead: T6) 8.055 sec ET6) 7.96 sec

PO7)Dynamic Strength – Vertical Jump: T7) 63cm ET7) 65cm

Strength Measurement / Functional Movement

PO8) Back Squat 5RM: T8) 115kg ET8) 120kgPO9) Step up 5RM: T9) 65kg ET9) 75kgPO10) Bench Press 5RM: T10) 65kg ET10) 80kgPO11) Weighted Pull Up 5RM: T11) 90kg ET11) 99kgPO13) Overall Movement Score: T13) 72 / 93 ET13) 74 / 93

References• Akubat, I., & Abt, G. (2011). Intermittent exercise alters the heart rate-blood lactate relationship used for calculating the trainnig impulse (trimp) in team sport

players. Journal of science and medicine in sport, 14, 249-253.

• Bangsbo, J., Mohr, M., & Krustrup, P. (2006). Physical and metabolic demands of training and match play in the elite football player. Journal of sports science , 24, 665-674.

• Bompa, T., & Haff, G. (2009). Periodization: Theory and methodology of training. (5 ed., Vol. 1, pp. 1-350). Leeds: Human Kinetics• Cardinale, M., Newton, R., & Nosaka, K. (2011). Strength and conditioning: Biological principles and practical applications. (1 ed., Vol. 1, pp. 308-311).

Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.• Comfort, P., & Abrahamson, E. (2010). Sports rehabilitation and injury prevention. (1 ed., pp. 1-517). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.• Di Salvo, V., Baron, R., Tschan, H., Calderon-Montero, F., Bachl, N., & Pigozzi, F. (2007). Performance characteristics according to playing position in elite soccer.

International Journal of Sports Medicine, 28, 222-227. • Edwards, A., Clark, N., & Macfadyen, A. (2003). Lactate and ventilatory thresholds reflect the training status of professional soccer players where maximum

aerobic power is unchanged. Journal of sports science and medicine, 2, 23-29. • Gamble, P. (2013). Strength and conditioning for team sports. (2 ed., pp. 1-285). New York: Routledge.• Jeffreys, I. (2007). Total soccer fitness. (1 ed., pp. 9-233). Monterey: Coaches choice.• Junge, A., & Dvorak, J. (2004). Soccer injuries: a review on incidence and prevention. Sports Medicine, 34, 929-938. • Lloyd, R., & Oliver, J. (2012). The youth physical development model: A new approach to long-term athletic development. Strength and conditioning journal, 34,

61-72. • Mirwald, R., Adam, D., Baxter-Jones, G., Bailey, D., & Beunen, G. (2002). An assessment of maturity from anthropometric measurements. Medicine and science

in sports and exercise, 10, 689-694. • Reilly, T. (2007). The science of training - soccer. (1 ed., pp. 1-189). Oxon: Routledge.• Reilly, T., Bangsbo, J., & Franks, A. (2000). Anthropometric and physiological predispositions for elite soccer. Journal of sports sciences, 18, 669-683. • Spencer, M., Bishop, D., Dawson, B., & Goodman, C. (2005). Physiological and metabolic responses of repeated sprint activities. Journal of sports medicine, 35,

1025-1044. • Williams, A. (2013). Science and soccer. (3 ed., pp. 1-390). Oxon: Routledge.• Wells, C., Edwards, A., Winter, E., Fysh, M., & Drust, B. (2012). Sport-specific fitness testing differentiates proffesional from amateur soccer players where vo2

max and vo2 kinetics do not. Journal of sports medicine and physical fitness, 52, 245-54. • Woods, C., Hawkins, R., Hulse, M., & Hodson, A. (2002). The football association medical research programme: an audit of injuries in professional football -

analysis of preseason injuries. British journal of sports medicine, 36, 436-441.