↓ Skip to main content

Physiology of Small-Sided Games Training in Football

Overview of attention for article published in Sports Medicine, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
22 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
580 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
1070 Mendeley
Title
Physiology of Small-Sided Games Training in Football
Published in
Sports Medicine, October 2012
DOI 10.2165/11539740-000000000-00000
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen V. Hill-Haas, Brian Dawson, Franco M. Impellizzeri, Aaron J. Coutts

Abstract

Small-sided games (SSGs) are played on reduced pitch areas, often using modified rules and involving a smaller number of players than traditional football. These games are less structured than traditional fitness training methods but are very popular training drills for players of all ages and levels. At present, there is relatively little information regarding how SSGs can best be used to improve physical capacities and technical or tactical skills in footballers. However, many prescriptive variables controlled by the coach can influence the exercise intensity during SSGs. Coaches usually attempt to change the training stimulus in SSGs through altering the pitch area, player number, coach encouragement, training regimen (continuous vs interval training), rules and the use of goalkeepers. In general, it appears that SSG exercise intensity is increased with the concurrent reduction in player number and increase in relative pitch area per player. However, the inverse relationship between the number of players in each SSG and exercise intensity does not apply to the time-motion characteristics. Consistent coach encouragement can also increase training intensity, but most rule changes do not appear to strongly affect exercise intensity. The variation of exercise intensity measures are lower in smaller game formats (e.g. three vs three) and have acceptable reproducibility when the same game is repeated between different training sessions or within the same session. The variation in exercise intensity during SSGs can also be improved with consistent coach encouragement but it is still more variable than traditional generic training methods. Other studies have also shown that SSGs containing fewer players can exceed match intensity and elicit similar intensities to both long- and short-duration high-intensity interval running. It also appears that fitness and football-specific performance can be improved equally with SSG and generic training drills. Future research is required to examine the optimal periodization strategies of SSGs training for the long-term development of physiological capacity, technical skill and tactical proficiency.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,070 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 7 <1%
Portugal 5 <1%
United States 2 <1%
Spain 2 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
French Polynesia 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 1048 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 208 19%
Student > Bachelor 154 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 113 11%
Student > Postgraduate 66 6%
Researcher 57 5%
Other 191 18%
Unknown 281 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 632 59%
Social Sciences 30 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 24 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 2%
Unspecified 13 1%
Other 51 5%
Unknown 303 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 May 2022.
All research outputs
#1,980,909
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Sports Medicine
#1,392
of 2,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,342
of 192,632 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Sports Medicine
#213
of 831 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,875 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 192,632 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 831 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.