This study examined the evolution of physical and technical soccer performance across a 7-season period in the English Premier League. Match performance observations (n=14 700) were analysed for emergent trends. Total distance covered during a match was ~2% lower in 2006-07 compared to 2012-13. Across 7 seasons, high-intensity running distance and actions increased by ~30% (890±299 vs. 1 151±337 m, p<0.001; ES: 0.82) and ~50% (118±36 vs. 176±46, p<0.001; ES: 1.41), respectively. Sprint distance and number of sprints increased by ~35% (232±114 vs. 350±139 m, p<0.001; ES: 0.93) and ~85% (31±14 vs. 57±20, p<0.001; ES: 1.46), respectively. Mean sprint distance was shorter in 2012-13 compared to 2006-07 (5.9±0.8 vs. 6.9±1.3 m, p<0.001; ES: 0.91), with the proportion of explosive sprints increasing (34±11 vs. 47±9%, p<0.001; ES: 1.31). Players performed more passes (35±17 vs. 25±13, p<0.001; ES: 0.66) and successful passes (83±10% vs. 76±13%, p<0.001; ES: 0.60) in 2012-13 compared to 2006-07. Whereas the number of short and medium passes increased across time (p<0.001; ES>0.6), the number of long passes varied little (p<0.001; ES: 0.11). This data demonstrates evolution of physical and technical parameters in the English Premier League, and could be used to aid talent identification, training and conditioning preparation.

This study aimed to investigate position-specific evolution of physical and technical performance parameters in the English Premier League (EPL). Match performance observations (n=14700) were collected using a multiple-camera computerised tracking system across seven seasons (2006-07 to 2012-13). Data were analysed relative to five playing positions: central defenders (n=3792), full backs (n=3420), central midfielders (n=3200), wide midfielders (n=2136) and attackers (n=2152). High-intensity running distance increased in the final season versus the first season in all playing positions (p<0.05, ES: 0.9-1.3) with full backs displaying the greatest increase (~36% higher in 2012-13). Similar trends were observed for sprint distance with full backs demonstrating the most pronounced increase across the seven seasons (36-63%, p<0.001, ES: 0.8-1.3). Central players (central defenders and midfielders) illustrated the most pronounced increases in total passes and pass success rate (p<0.05, ES: 0.7-0.9) whilst wide players (full backs and wide midfielders) demonstrated only small-moderate increases in total passes and pass success rate (p<0.05, ES: 0.6-0.8). The data demonstrates that evolving tactics in the EPL have impacted on the physical demands of wide players and the technical requirements of central players. These findings could be used for talent identification or position-specific physical and technical training.

No abstract

The aims of this study were to (1) determine the reproducibility of sub-maximal and maximal versions of the Yo-Yo intermittent endurance test level 2 (Yo-Yo IE2 test), (2) assess the relationship between the Yo-Yo IE2 test and match performance and (3) quantify the sensitivity of the Yo-Yo IE2 test to detect test-retest changes and discriminate between performance for different playing standards and positions in elite soccer. Elite (n = 148) and sub-elite male (n = 14) soccer players carried out the Yo-Yo IE2 test on several occasions over consecutive seasons. Test-retest coefficient of variation (CV) in Yo-Yo IE2 test performance and heart rate after 6 min were 3.9% (n = 37) and 1.4% (n = 32), respectively. Elite male senior and youth U19 players Yo-Yo IE2 performances were better (P < 0.01) than elite youth U16s and sub-elite players (2,603 ± 451 and 2,534 ± 549 vs. 1,855 ± 535 vs. 1,749 ± 382 m). The intra- and inter-season CV for Yo-Yo IE2 test performance were 4.2 and 5.6%, respectively. A correlation was observed (P < 0.05) between Yo-Yo IE2 test performance and the total (r = 0.74) and high-intensity (r = 0.58) running distance covered in a match. A correlation was also evident (P < 0.01) between Yo-Yo IE2 test heart rate after 6 min expressed in percentage of maximal heart rate and the peak values for high-intensity running performed by midfielders in 5-min (r = -0.71), 15-min (r = -0.75) and 45-min periods (r = -0.77). The present data demonstrate that the Yo-Yo IE2 test is reproducible and can be used to determine the capacity of elite soccer players to perform intense intermittent exercise. Furthermore, the Yo-Yo IE2 test was shown to be a sensitive tool that not only relates to match performance but can also differentiate between intermittent exercise performance of players in various standards, stages of the season and playing positions.

This study investigated the evolution of physical and technical performances in the English Premier League (EPL) with special reference to league ranking. Match performance observations (n=14700) were collected using a multiple-camera computerised tracking system across seven consecutive EPL seasons (2006-07 to 2012-13) season. The data demonstrate that physical and technical performances have evolved more in Tier B than any other Tier in the EPL and could indicate a narrowing of the performance gap between the top two Tiers.

For personal use only. Permission required for all other uses.

BackgroundRevefenacin is a once-daily long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) in clinical development for the treatment of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In a dose-ranging study, nebulized once-daily revefenacin had a long duration of action in patients after 7 days’ administration of doses up to 700 μg. In this multiple-dose study, the bronchodilation efficacy and adverse events profile were characterized in patients administered nebulized revefenacin once daily for 28 days.MethodsA total of 355 COPD patients (mean age 62 years, mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1] 44% of predicted) were randomized in a double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel group study. Inhaled corticosteroids as well as short-acting bronchodilators were permitted. Once-daily treatments (44, 88, 175 or 350 μg revefenacin or matching placebo) were administered by a standard jet nebulizer, for 28 days. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in D28 trough FEV1, and secondary endpoints included weighted mean FEV1 over 0 to 24 h and rescue medication (albuterol) use. Safety evaluations included adverse events, laboratory assessments, electrocardiograms and 24-h Holter profiles.ResultsRevefenacin (88, 175 and 350 μg) significantly improved D28 trough FEV1 over placebo (187.4, 166.6 and 170.6 mL, respectively, all p < 0.001); 44 μg produced a sub-therapeutic response. At doses ≥88 μg, more than 80% of patients achieved at least a 100-mL increase from baseline FEV1 in the first 4 h post dose compared with 33% of placebo patients. For doses ≥88 μg, D28 24 h weighted mean differences from placebo for FEV1 were numerically similar to respective trough FEV1 values, indicating bronchodilation was sustained for 24 h post dose. Doses ≥88 μg reduced the average number of albuterol puffs/day by more than one puff/day. The 350 μg dose did not demonstrate additional efficacy over that observed with 175 μg revefenacin. Revefenacin was generally well tolerated, with minimal reports of systemic anti-cholinergic effects.ConclusionsThese data suggest that 88 and 175 μg revefenacin are appropriate doses for use in longer-term safety and efficacy trials. Revefenacin offers the potential for the first once-daily LAMA for nebulization in patients with COPD who require or prefer a nebulized drug delivery option.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02040792. Registered January 16, 2014.

The purpose of the study was to examine the perspectives of both academics and practitioners in relation to forming applied collaborative sport science research within team sports. Ninety-three participants who had previously engaged in collaborative research partnerships within team sports completed an online survey which focused on motivations and barriers for forming collaborations using blinded sliding scale (0-100) and rank order list. Research collaborations were mainly formed to improve the team performance (Academic: 73.6 ± 23.3; Practitioner: 84.3 ± 16.0; effect size (ES = 0.54), small). Academics ranked journal articles' importance significantly higher than practitioners did (Academic: M = 53.9; Practitioner: 36.0; z = -3.18, p = .001, p < q). However, practitioners rated one-to-one communication as more preferential (Academic: M = 41.3; Practitioner 56.1; z = -2.62, p = .009, p < q). Some potential barriers were found in terms of staff buy in (Academic: 70.0 ± 25.5; Practitioner: 56.8 ± 27.3; ES = 0.50, small) and funding (Academic: 68.0 ± 24.9; Practitioner: 67.5 ± 28.0; ES = 0.02, trivial). Both groups revealed low motivation for invasive mechanistic research (Academic: 36.3 ± 24.2; Practitioner: 36.4 ± 27.5; ES = 0.01, trivial), with practitioners have a preference towards 'fast' type research. There was a general agreement between academics and practitioners for forming research collaborations. Some potential barriers still exist (e.g. staff buy in and funding), with practitioners preferring 'fast' informal research dissemination compared to the 'slow' quality control approach of academics.