From May 31^st to June 2^nd, 2017, I and other representatives from Soccer Fitness Inc. and Sport Performance Analytics Inc. presented our research at the 5^th World Conference on Science and Soccer in Rennes, France.  For me, this was the 7^th time I have travelled to an international soccer science conference to present research, dating all the way back to the 6^th World Congress on Science and Football in Antalya, Turkey in 2007.  Interestingly, a thought that had occurred to me at that time over 10 years ago ended up resurfacing this past week in France.

The Congress in Turkey in 2007 was held in the year after the 2006 FIFA World Cup, a tournament won by Italy.  Marcello Lippi, the coach of the Italian National Team, was invited as a guest speaker at the Congress in Turkey.  In his speech, he commented that the success of the Italian team at the 2006 World Cup was the result of a combination of factors, including self-assessment, refection, and constructive criticism which led to eventual improvements in the Italian soccer system in the years leading up to the tournament.

Among the aspects of Italian soccer that were improved upon prior to their success in the World Cup were their talent identification programs, national coaching schools, national team training camps and international competitions leading into World Cup qualification, as well as training, monitoring, and recovery practices utilised within the team itself.

Upon hearing this information, I remember remarking to colleague how impressive it was to me that the Italian National Team, which prior to the 2006 World Cup had been successful but not victorious in international soccer since their last World Cup win in 1982, was so keen to be critical of their programs and systems, and to strive to make them better.

After all, I came from Canada, where our Men’s National Team had failed to qualify for the FIFA World Cup for over 20 years and there seemed to be a general sense of apathy surrounding our future chances of World Cup qualification or other international success.

Fast-forward 10 years, and during a presentation by Dr. Antonio Figuerido from the Portuguese Football Association, I experienced a moment of “Déjà vu.”  Dr. Figuerido’s presentation identified that a selection bias exists amongst Portuguese professional youth academy coaches, towards players in the U13-U15 age categories who are “early developers” (bigger, stronger, and faster than their peers).  He went on to point out that if the Portuguese clubs and National Teams expect to develop top players and to compete successfully at the international level, this bias needs to be addressed and eliminated.

Think about that for a moment.  The top coaches in Portugal – a country that just won the 2016 UEFA European Championship and has developed, among others, one of the greatest players of this generation in Cristiano Ronaldo – are still humble enough to admit when they have a problem, and to look objectively to scientific experts in order to fix the problem.

The take-home message from this Conference, for me, was that we in the Canadian soccer community also need to be more humble in order for us to become better.  Canadian soccer players, coaches, fitness coaches and administrators need to collectively acknowledge that if and when we are to compete at the professional and international levels, we will be competing against countries – like Portugal and Italy – who have spent decades critically analysing their soccer programs, looking for problems and inefficiencies, and coming up with solutions to them.

A good place for us to start would be to become more open-minded towards the use of objective scientific research and technology to enhance the training and development of our athletes, and a great way to do this would be for more Canadian soccer coaches and fitness coaches to attend conferences such as the World Conference on Science and Soccer.

Many of the world’s leading experts in a variety of scientific fields of study, including coaching, youth development, performance training, monitoring of training load and recovery, and nutrition – all of which are directly relevant to the work that soccer coaches and fitness coaches do on a day-to-day basis in Canada – were present at this year’s Conference.

In consonance with this line of thinking, a recurring theme amongst many of the Keynote and Plenary speakers at the Conference was the need to develop better synergy between sports scientists (and the research they do / findings they produce) and coaches/fitness coaches (for the practical on-field work they do).  Even at the top levels of the game, people all over the world are recognising the important role that sports science plays in player development and high performance soccer.  Canadian soccer professionals must also acknowledge this role and look to bridge the gaps that presently exist between scientists and practitioners.

If we continue to fall into the trap of thinking that we already have all of the answers, we are likely to remain stagnant in our position relative to the rest of the world.  And if that happens, the World Conference on Science and Soccer in 10 years’ time may elicit the same feelings of Deja-vu as this year’s edition did.

I’d love to hear your thoughts or comments on this topic.  Drop me a line here to get the conversation started.

Today we worked our first match, providing performance analysis to the U19 Academy team in their game versus the Nacional Universidad U19 team.  Not only was the weather much nicer – sunny with a slight breeze – the match was also played on one of the best fields in all of Uruguay – Nacional’s training pitch in the city of Canelones, which neighbours Montevideo.

The players wore Polar Team Pro heart rate and GPS units, (also equipped with accelerometers), which is a brand new system available in Canada only through Coach Farzad and his company, Sports Performance Analytics Inc.  Using this system, we were able to give live information and feedback to the coaches and players regarding their heart rate/exercise intensity level, work rate, distance covered, number of sprints, and the speed of those sprints.

Later, a full match report will be provided to the coaching staff, including statistical analysis of the data recorded, comparisons to standards and norms for age, gender, and playing position, and suggestions for feedback to be given to the players.

It was a very rewarding experience for Coach Farzad and I, especially because we got to see how appreciative the coaches and players are of the work that we do as fitness coaches and sports scientists.

One possible reason that the coaches in Uruguay are so supportive of sports science is that they are all required to study the subject in order to obtain their coaching licenses.  I touched on this topic in a previous blog earlier this week:

https://soccerfitnessgols.com/2016/07/03/soccer-in-uruguay-day-2-the-importance-of-coach-education/

Whereas in Canada, often even in some of the higher levels of soccer that Coach Farzad and I have worked, coaches sometimes do not recognise, value, or use the information provided to them through performance and match analysis, here in Uruguay the entire coaching staff could not stop asking us questions about this information, even for several hours after the match was over.

Ultimately, the aim of a fitness coach or sports scientist must be to see and analyse the game from a different perspective, and then to simplify this analysis in order to provide concise information to the coaching staff, who can then use this information to alter and adjust their strategy and tactics if needed.  When we are included as part of the coaching staff and can work as a cohesive unit (as was the case this afternoon), the end result is more efficient training, and more effective match performance.

Tomorrow there will be a light training session, which precedes a friendly match on Saturday.  Looking forward to sharing more of this experience with you in 24 hours’ time!

Recently I made the decision to go back to school, and as part of the coursework, I was required to take an Advanced Biomechanics course, in which I am presently enrolled.  Our latest assignment for this course was to choose a sports movement that involves the upper body, and to analyse the movement from a biomechanical perspective – that is, what muscles cause the movement, what different types of movements combine to form the movement, and what can an athlete do in order for the movement to be executed efficiently.

For this assignment, I decided to examine what I believe to be the “forgotten movement” in soccer, the throw-in.

Honestly.  Think about it – when was the last time you actually thought about throw-ins?

If you’re a player, you probably fall into one of two categories with regards to your opinion about throw-ins.  You either completely ignore technique in favor of getting the ball as quickly as possible to an open player, or alternatively, you throw for maximum power, in an attempt to advance the ball as far forwards as possible.

Players who fall in the first category – i.e. those who ignore throw-in technique – may not necessarily want to continue reading.  If, however, maximum throw-in distance is your objective, then the insight I was able to gain from my recent project will definitely be of interest to you.

In my report, I summarized the findings from a recent study by Linthrone & Everett (2005), that used 2-D video to investigate which release angle (the angle formed between a horizontal line in the centre of the ball – the x-axis – and the line of trajectory of the ball, when it is in flight), allowed for maximum throw-in distance.  The diagram below (reprinted from the study) provides a visual representation of the throw-in technique, including the release speed (“v”); the release angle (“θ”); the relative release height (“h”); and the horizontal range of the throw-in (“R”).

Researchers had subjects attempt throw-ins from release angles ranging from 10° to 60°, in 5-10° increments.  The results of their study indicated that a release angle of approximately 30° was most effective at maximizing the total distance of the throw-in.  This is because the relatively lower release angle (30°, as opposed to a larger angle of 45°) allowed for significantly greater release speed which, when factored into the equation, made the ball travel further.  The next figure below (also reprinted from the study) depicts the relationship between release angle, and release speed.  As you can see, higher release speeds were achieved with relatively lower release angles, and the highest release speeds were achieved with a release angle of approximately 30°.

Based on the results of this study, a take-home message for soccer coaches and players is that, if they wish to achieve maximum distance in their throw-ins, they should try to shorten their release angle.  This can be done by slightly lowering the shoulders, and aiming to make the ball travel a bit more forwards and a bit less upwards.  This slight tweak in throw-in technique will allow players to maximize their release speed, thereby increasing the distance of their throw-ins.

I hope you enjoyed this article and as always, welcome your feedback.  Drop me a line here to get the conversation started.

For the past 10 years, my business has provided fitness testing, training, and coach education to soccer players, coaches and teams from countless different amateur youth soccer clubs across Ontario.  During this time, I have had many discussions and conversations with the club head coaches, members of technical staff, and even the administrators and board members from these different organizations.  During these discussions I have realized that, although virtually all amateur youth soccer clubs across Ontario have the goal of developing better soccer players, they simply do not have enough time and resources to adequately build and deliver player development programs. The reason for this lack of time and resources is that youth amateur soccer clubs are presently set up to divide their energy and their focus between both recreational “house league”, and competitive “rep” – or player development – programs.  Although clubs run these two separate soccer streams believing they have the best interests of the players in mind, the end result is that the house league and rep programs compete for resources, and the synergies between these programs are limited at best.

One main problem facing amateur youth soccer clubs in Ontario today is that they have a very high cost (in both dollars, and time spent) to administer their house league programs.  These programs can have hundreds if not thousands of registered players, and thus they require a significant amount of time, resources, and manpower to run efficiently.  All house league programs, unfortunately, present little to no benefit to any soccer club’s competitive / development stream.  This is because the great majority of the players involved in recreational or house league soccer have no ambition of playing soccer competitively and/or progressing to become a professional or National Team player (so they will never be participants in the development stream).  Thus the high costs associated with an amateur club’s house league program are simply not justified by any benefits they may provide to the same club’s competitive / player development program.

A second problem for amateur youth soccer clubs is that their competitive / player development streams need to be broader, and more inclusive.  Most clubs operate their competitive programs under a system whereby players are identified and selected out of house leagues when they are 7-8 years old.  After this age, players in the house league program have a very small chance of being identified, because the club’s house league and rep / competitive programs run in parallel to each other, and there is little to no scouting in the house league programs from the ages of 9 and up.  Even most club’s rep / competitive programs, although some have been re-structured as standards-based systems such as the Ontario Player Development League (OPDL), still comprise rosters of only 15-20 players per age group.  So the total number of rep / competitive players in any club’s developmental streams is still very small in relation to the total number of recreational / house league players.  This presents a problem for clubs because, in order for a club to deliver a standards-based developmental program, they must employ professional / paid coaches, fitness coaches, and athletic therapists (all of whom must be paid for their work), and also invest a significant amount of money and resources into indoor/outdoor field rentals, and team travel.  Thus the traditional model for most amateur clubs’ developmental programs, whereby only the players deemed “good enough” at 7-8 years of age, are selected into the competitive/player development stream, is simply not sustainable, because this very small number of players will be forced to bear the very high cost (paying coaches, fitness coaches, athletic therapists, field/gym rentals, team travel, etc..) associated with administering these player development programs.

One potential solution which may help standards-based player development programs (like the Ontario Player Development League) to become more sustainable would be for the pool of players in each age group of these programs to become larger.  This larger number of players in each age group would make the cost of administering developmental programs more manageable for any amateur youth soccer club.  This is because the larger number of players could then share in some of the fixed the costs of coaching, fitness training, therapy, and field/gym rentals, making the cost to each individual player significantly lower.  A second, potentially effective solution to this problem in Ontario would be to separate the recreational or house league stream from the competitive or player development stream.  We could have clubs focused exclusively on delivering recreational / house league soccer to the large number of players who do not have the ambition to pay competitive soccer, and entirely different clubs focused exclusively on delivering competitive/player development programs, with larger player pools.  This would allow the clubs who are experts in player development to focus all of their attention, time and resources into this stream, and leave the recreational / house league programs to the different clubs in that stream.

Imagine if a top professional club or academy in another country (Barcelona, or Bayern Munich, for example) had to divide its time, energy and resources into its competitive / developmental program (which is set up to help players progress to become professionals with the first team) and a recreational soccer program.  No foreign club or academy in any other country would ever want to saddle themselves with this unnecessary burden.  Why, then, do we expect our own amateur soccer clubs here in Ontario to be experts in both recreational soccer and player development?  It is possible that by increasing the number of players in specific clubs’ developmental soccer programs, while simultaneously separating these clubs – and their programs – from other clubs’ recreational house league programs, we may be able to provide a more sustainable model for player development in this province.

I’d love to hear your thoughts about this topic.  Drop me a line here to get the conversation started.

The United States Women’s National Soccer Team decided to withdraw today from their scheduled friendly match versus Trinidad and Tobago in Aloha, Hawaii.  The official reason cited for the cancellation was “dangerous field conditions” and. after seeing the picture above (originally posted by ESPN reporter and former US Women’s National Team star and World Cup winner Julie Foudy on Twitter this afternoon), it’s hard to argue with that sentiment.

The controversy surrounding today’s cancelled match, however, has seemed to re-kindle complaints regarding the use of artificial turf in soccer in general and women’s soccer in particular, that were very much commonplace earlier this year at the 2015 FIFA Women’s World Cup in Canada.  In that tournament, all 53 matches were played on synthetic turf fields.  Several of the participating players and teams, including members of the Canadian and United States Women’s National Teams, were very vocal in their criticism of FIFA for sanctioning and allowing a major international women’s soccer tournament to be played on synthetic turf.  Among their valid points was that there has never been – and likely never will be – an international men’s soccer tournament played on anything but natural grass.

Much of the debate surrounding the efficacy of the use of synthetic turf fields in soccer has come about as a result of opinions that they are unsafe and place players at a higher risk of injury.  In an article published today by Julie Kliegman of http://www.theweek.com, she states that the United States Women’s players have “taken issue” with playing on synthetic turf fields because they are “considered more dangerous for players than natural grass.”  Recent scientific evidence, however, has suggested that these concerns about the safety – or lack thereof – of synthetic turf surfaces may be unfounded.

Several different independent scientific literature reviews have concluded that there are no differences in incidence and/or risk of injury in soccer between synthetic and natural grass surfaces.  Firstly, in a paper titled “The effect of playing surface on injury rate: a review of the current literature” in 2010, Dragoo & Braun concluded that “despite differences in injury type, the rate of injury on third-generation and natural grass surfaces appears to be comparable.”  More recently, a 2013 paper titled “a review of football injuries on third and fourth generation artificial turfs compared with natural turfs” conducted by Williams et. al. concluded that “studies have provided strong evidence for comparable rates of injury between new generation artificial turfs and natural turfs.”  Finally, a 2015 review by Balazs et. al. focusing specifically on knee injuries titled “Risk of anterior cruciate ligament injury in athletes on synthetic playing surfaces: a systematic review” found that “while high-quality studies support an increased rate of ACL injury on synthetic playing surfaces in American football, there is no apparent increased risk in soccer.”  Furthermore, a number of different soccer-specific research studies, including those by Aoki et. al. (2010), Bjorneboe et. al. (2010, Almutawa et. al. (2014), and Kristenson et. al. (2015) all found no significant difference in injury rates, or risk of injury, between artificial and natural soccer playing surfaces.

Poor quality fields and unsafe field playing surfaces, whether they are synthetic or natural, are certainly a valid concern for any competitive soccer player or team, male or female.  Singling out synthetic turf surfaces, however, as being “more dangerous” than natural grass surfaces, does not make sense based on present scientific evidence.  While more research is needed before any definitive conclusions about the safety of artificial playing surfaces can be made, right now it seems as though there are no differences in safety between artificial and natural playing surfaces for soccer players.

I’d love to hear your thoughts about this topic.  Drop me a line here to get the conversation started.

2015 marks the 15^th year that I have been working in soccer.  In that time, I have had thousands of conversations with coaches, parents, and players, at virtually all of the different levels of the game.  Upon reflecting on these conversations it has become apparent to me that many of us subjectively think and feel that we are experts in soccer, and that we know and understand the game better than everyone else around us.  Last week, in Part 1 of this article, I discussed how and why our subjective opinions can hamper player development.  This week, in Part 2, I will provide some insight into strategies that we as coaches and fitness coaches can use to ensure that we remain objective in our work.

To start with, I have provided below an excellent and apt quote from Yogi Berra (not a soccer player, but certainly a world class athlete, who played baseball for the New York Yankees in the 1950’s and 60’s):

“If you don’t know where you’re going, you’ll wind up someplace else.”

I really like this quote because it captures in a very brief and concise way – in my interpretation at least – just how important it is to measure performance in sports.  “knowing where you’re going”, to me, implies that a coach or fitness coach must know very clearly how the players and team has performed, in order to set specific objectives aimed at improving performance and “wind up” where they want to go.

If we accept that measuring performance in sports like soccer is important, then the next challenge is to determine simple and effective ways to eliminate subjective opinions from performance measurement.  The best way to do this is through the collection of objective data (facts, which are not subject to anyone’s opinion, about how players have performed in training and match play).  The use of technology such as GPS, and video-based software programs like Pro Zone or Game Breaker are certainly very effective tools to measure performance, however, they are expensive and time-consuming to use, and thus are not a practical option for the great majority of amateur youth soccer coaches in Canada.  A more cost-effective way to collect objective data is to use alternative methods of measurement which do not require any expensive technological equipment or computer software.  These methods must provide coaches and fitness coaches with objective data that is similar to the kind of data that can be generated from more expensive technology and software, but is also simple to understand, disseminate, and eventually present to their players and teams.  Below are three examples of simple and proven strategies coaches and fitness coaches can use to objectively measure their players’ performance in training and match play.

1. Rating of Perceived Exertion scales (to measure training and match intensity and load)

Rating of Perceived Exertion or RPE is a scale of measurement used to determined players’ opinions about how “hard” their level of physical exertion was during a training session or match.  There are several different RPE scales that have been used in scientific literature.  I prefer to use one developed by Borg (1982), which requires players to answer the question “how hard was your workout?”  The scale is scores from 0-10 (“0” being “rest”, and “10” being “maximal”).  I have provided a link to a PDF copy of the Borg 0-10 RPE scale below.  Coaches and fitness coaches can simply show this scale to their players following every training session and match, and record their scores.  Because these scores represent measurements of intensity and loading, once the data has been collected, coaches and fitness coaches can then use it to plan and adjust the intensity/loading in their training sessions in order to achieve desired results.

Borg0-10RPEScale

2. Standardized, technical performance assessments (to measure technical skill performance)

In high performance youth soccer environments, the development and improvement of technical skills has to be of paramount importance to coaches and fitness coaches.  Technical ability, after all, provides the foundation for players’ future potential development.  If a set of standardized, objective technical assessments is implemented by a team’s coaching staff, players’ level of ability, as well as their rate of improvement in technical ability over the course of a season, can be easily measured.  Over time, if the same standardized system is used over multiple seasons and – even better – by multiple clubs across multiple age groups and both genders, then a set of standardized normative data for technical ability can be generated.  Players and teams can then be evaluated based on comparisons to these age- and gender-specific normative standards.  Over time, youth soccer clubs can then be evaluated based on how well their players and teams improve on these standardized tests, relative to the improvement of other competing clubs.  The Ontario Soccer Association has seemingly already recognized the importance of technical assessments, having developed its own Technical benchmark Exercises for the Ontario Player Development League in 2014.  Below is a link to the OSA’s Technical Benchmark Exercises PDF document.

OPDL-Player-Technical-Benchmark-Excercises-2015

3. Free or low-cost mobile apps (to measure tactical performance)

There presently exists an abundance of mobile applications, available for download on mobile devices including phones and tablet computers, which can be used to measure performance in training and match play.  These apps range in price and functionality from the free ones (such as iCODA, Tag&Go, and Pocketcoder), to low-cost options (such as Performa, or FootyTracker).  These apps typically require a coach to watch a training session or match with their phone or tablet in hand, and manually enter data or “code” the actions that occur.  Many different types of objective data can be collected and analysed in this way, including pass completion percentage, ball retention, ball possession, shots on target, tackles/challenges for the ball, numbers of corners or free kicks, and so on).  If coaches or fitness coaches can collect this type of standardized, objective data over multiple training sessions or matches, they can then measures and assess their players’ performance over time and. As would be the case with technical assessments, they can also evaluate their players’ improvements relative to other age- and gender-specific standards and norms.

In conclusion, the use of standardized, objective performance measurements like the ones discussed in this article does not necessarily need to completely eliminate or discredit coaches’ subjective opinions.  On the contrary, when used properly, objective performance measurements can be used to challenge and refine coaches’ own opinions and analysis.  If we as coaches and fitness coaches truly want to become better at maximizing the development of the players we work with, we need to keep an open mind and accept the use of standardized assessments and furthermore, we need to be willing to use the data taken from them to change our own approach to training and match play if needed.

I’d love to hear your thoughts about this topic.  Drop me a line here to get the conversation started.

Great article and follow up to a recent article titled “The Race to Nowhere in Youth Sports”. The conclusions contain recommendations for parents, athletes, and youth sports organizations. I’d love to hear your thoughts about this topic. Drop me a line here to get the conversation started.

This year marks my 3^rd season as Assistant Coach and Fitness Coach with the University of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT) Ridgebacks Women’s Varsity Soccer Team.   The Women’s Soccer program at UOIT itself also happens to be only 3 years old, having been introduced in the winter of 2012.  The first three years in our team’s history have been very successful.  We qualified for the play-offs in year one, and improved upon that record in year two by advancing to the OUA West Quarter-Finals.  Moving into a new division (OUA East) in year three. we finished the season in 2^nd place, with a 12-2-2 record (going unbeaten in our first 12 games), and even earned a CIS National Top-10 ranking for the majority of the year, finishing with a #7 ranking heading into the play-offs.  We continued to get good results in the post-season, earning a bronze medal in the OUA Final Four, plus a place in the 2014 CIS National Championships at Laval University in Quebec City, as the 3^rd place team from Ontario.  The success of the UOIT Ridgebacks Women’s Varsity Soccer Team owes itself to numerous factors and people, the most important of which is the Head Coach who literally built the team from scratch three years ago, Peyvand Mossavat (he was also named OUA East, and CIS Coach of the Year this season).  I am honored to have been a part of the coaching staff since the team’s inception, and to have contributed to its impressive performances on the pitch.

My next four posts will briefly describe of the four physical preparation strategies that I and the Coaching Staff used, which have contributed to our team’s success over the past three year in general, and specifically during the incredible 2014 season:

4. Get the in-season fitness training right (with, and without the ball):

Even though the university competitive season is short, with the right timing of training, teams can still improve fitness during the season.  In general, schedule allows for only one day per week of intense fitness training.  In the first month (September) aerobic training should be done with a high intensity (speed) but low volume (number of repetitions/distance covered).  Work periods of 30 seconds – 1 minute, with work-to-rest ratios of 1:2 – 1:4, are most effective.  It is also useful to use a combination of hard running workouts (mush easier to control for intensity) with technical exercises/small-sided games (more specific to soccer).  As the season progresses into the second month (October) a switch must be made to performing repeated sprint training and speed training.  Must shorter work periods (5-10 seconds) with much longer work-to-rest ratios (1:5 – 1:10) are most effective.  Again, combining running and sprinting exercises both with and without the ball works best.

This year marks my 3^rd season as Assistant Coach and Fitness Coach with the University of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT) Ridgebacks Women’s Varsity Soccer Team.   The Women’s Soccer program at UOIT itself also happens to be only 3 years old, having been introduced in the winter of 2012.  The first three years in our team’s history have been very successful.  We qualified for the play-offs in year one, and improved upon that record in year two by advancing to the OUA West Quarter-Finals.  Moving into a new division (OUA East) in year three. we finished the season in 2^nd place, with a 12-2-2 record (going unbeaten in our first 12 games), and even earned a CIS National Top-10 ranking for the majority of the year, finishing with a #7 ranking heading into the play-offs.  We continued to get good results in the post-season, earning a bronze medal in the OUA Final Four, plus a place in the 2014 CIS National Championships at Laval University in Quebec City, as the 3^rd place team from Ontario.  The success of the UOIT Ridgebacks Women’s Varsity Soccer Team owes itself to numerous factors and people, the most important of which is the Head Coach who literally built the team from scratch three years ago, Peyvand Mossavat (he was also named OUA East, and CIS Coach of the Year this season).  I am honored to have been a part of the coaching staff since the team’s inception, and to have contributed to its impressive performances on the pitch.

My next four posts will briefly describe of the four physical preparation strategies that I and the Coaching Staff used, which have contributed to our team’s success over the past three year in general, and specifically during the incredible 2014 season:

3. Create home training programs (and hold players accountable to them):

As mentioned previously, the preparation time allotted for “pre-season” in university soccer is not nearly enough time to actually prepare players for the physical demands of the competitive season.  Thus, university players must use the spring and summer months to train and maximize their fitness levels.  Because university teams are prohibited from training together “as a team” during these months, fitness training for the players must be accomplished through home training programs, that the players must complete on their own.  Home training programs must focus on improving high intensity running ability, as this is the one area of fitness with the greatest capacity for improvement through proper training.  High intensity aerobic interval running (with 4-6 intervals of 3-4 minutes in duration and work-to-rest ratios of 1:1) is the most effective method of training to improve high intensity running ability.  Players must be held accountable to their home training programs.  This can be accomplished by having them sign-in and report their workouts, and of course also by conducting frequent fitness assessments to evaluate their progress throughout the year.

This year marks my 3^rd season as Assistant Coach and Fitness Coach with the University of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT) Ridgebacks Women’s Varsity Soccer Team.   The Women’s Soccer program at UOIT itself also happens to be only 3 years old, having been introduced in the winter of 2012.  The first three years in our team’s history have been very successful.  We qualified for the play-offs in year one, and improved upon that record in year two by advancing to the OUA West Quarter-Finals.  Moving into a new division (OUA East) in year three. we finished the season in 2^nd place, with a 12-2-2 record (going unbeaten in our first 12 games), and even earned a CIS National Top-10 ranking for the majority of the year, finishing with a #7 ranking heading into the play-offs.  We continued to get good results in the post-season, earning a bronze medal in the OUA Final Four, plus a place in the 2014 CIS National Championships at Laval University in Quebec City, as the 3^rd place team from Ontario.  The success of the UOIT Ridgebacks Women’s Varsity Soccer Team owes itself to numerous factors and people, the most important of which is the Head Coach who literally built the team from scratch three years ago, Peyvand Mossavat (he was also named OUA East, and CIS Coach of the Year this season).  I am honored to have been a part of the coaching staff since the team’s inception, and to have contributed to its impressive performances on the pitch.

My next four posts will briefly describe of the four physical preparation strategies that I and the Coaching Staff used, which have contributed to our team’s success over the past three year in general, and specifically during the incredible 2014 season:

Conduct the right fitness assessments (at the right time):

Of course, part of the process in recruiting players who are good athletes, as well as training to develop and maximize their athletic abilities, is having the right fitness assessment protocol to measure them.  The best time to test for speed and jumping ability is in the off-season or the beginning of the season.  This is because it is difficult to train to improve speed and jumping ability, so testing should be used to identify who is already good at these abilities.  Tests of high intensity running ability (like the Yo-Yo tests) must be used consistently (every 4 to 6 weeks) throughout the off-season, summer, and pre-season.  If athletes are training properly, there is a very large capacity to improve, and the Yo-Yo test in particular is very sensitive to improvements in fitness through training.

This year marks my 3^rd season as Assistant Coach and Fitness Coach with the University of Ontario Institute of Technology (UOIT) Ridgebacks Women’s Varsity Soccer Team.   The Women’s Soccer program at UOIT itself also happens to be only 3 years old, having been introduced in the winter of 2012.  The first three years in our team’s history have been very successful.  We qualified for the play-offs in year one, and improved upon that record in year two by advancing to the OUA West Quarter-Finals.  Moving into a new division (OUA East) in year three. we finished the season in 2^nd place, with a 12-2-2 record (going unbeaten in our first 12 games), and even earned a CIS National Top-10 ranking for the majority of the year, finishing with a #7 ranking heading into the play-offs.  We continued to get good results in the post-season, earning a bronze medal in the OUA Final Four, plus a place in the 2014 CIS National Championships at Laval University in Quebec City, as the 3^rd place team from Ontario.  The success of the UOIT Ridgebacks Women’s Varsity Soccer Team owes itself to numerous factors and people, the most important of which is the Head Coach who literally built the team from scratch three years ago, Peyvand Mossavat (he was also named OUA East, and CIS Coach of the Year this season).  I am honored to have been a part of the coaching staff since the team’s inception, and to have contributed to its impressive performances on the pitch.

My next four posts will briefly describe of the four physical preparation strategies that I and the Coaching Staff used, which have contributed to our team’s success over the past three year in general, and specifically during the incredible 2014 season:

1. Recruit good athletes (as well as good players):

The reality of university soccer is that the season is very short (only 2 ½ months including play-offs) and there are typically 2-3 games per week.  There is also very little time to prepare teams, as the actual “pre-season” comprises only 2 ½ weeks in the middle of August.  For teams to be successful, they must recruit players with certain athletic qualities that will enable them to thrive in this environment.  Among the qualities to look for are:

• Speed (especially over 20-35 metres)
• Leg strength and jumping ability
• High intensity running ability (as measured by a field test like the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test)

I’d love to hear your thoughts about this topic.  Drop me a line here to get the conversation started.

Those of you who know me may or may not know that I have recently gone back to school.  There are, of course, some negative aspects of this decision (less free time, higher stress, and of course the fact that I get to study statistics)!. My decision to go back to school did, however, bring with it at least one positive outcome – it has forced me to review relevant (soccer-specific) sports science research every week.

This past week, I came across a very interesting study done by a group of researchers from Norway (Shalfawi et. Al., 2013). The basic aim of this study was to compare two different types of training (repeated agility training, and repeated sprint training) on soccer players’ physical performance (assessed using a variety of measurements, including a linear running speed test, a counter movement jump, an agility test, and the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test to measure endurance).  17 players in total (all from the same Norwegian Olympic Women’s soccer team) were used or this study, and they were randomly assigned to either a repeated agility training group, or a repeated sprint training group (9 players participated in the repeated agility training group, and 8 players participated in the repeated sprint training group).  The players participated in their normal training routine over the course of the 8-week training period, which comprised 4 training sessions per week plus 1 game per week.  Additionally, the groups each completed two extra training sessions per week (specific to their particular training group).

Results of the study were very interesting to me.  The group that performed repeated agility training showed an improvement in endurance (Yo-Yo score), agility, and most importantly, also an improvement in linear running speed.  The repeated sprint training group improved endurance (Yo-Yo score) and linear running speed, but showed no improvement in agility.  This study seems to make the case that for soccer, the best training effects will come from using repeated, high intensity running exercises that include short sprints, but also changes of direction.  It would seem that this type of running is more specific and relevant to the actual running done in a game.  The fact that repeated agility training also improved linear running speed (speed without change in direction) would make this type of training the preferred method of training for soccer players.  Here is an example of the repeated agility training exercises used in the study:

RepeatedAgilityExercise

This run was done with the following protocol:

• 2 x 4 repetitions, 2 minutes rest between repetitions, 10 minutes rest between sets
• every two weeks, an additional 2 repetitions were added, until the 8th week, with the following protocol:
• 2 x 10 repetitions, 2 minutes rest between repetitions, 10 minutes rest between sets

Fitness coaches working with soccer players should consider using repeated agility training, as opposed to repeated sprint training, in order to maximize the benefits of their physical training programs.  I’d love to hear your thoughts about this topic.  Drop me a line here to get the conversation started.