The purpose of this study was to determine the relationships between selected physical qualities, change-of-direction (COD) speed, and defensive agility performance in Australian Rules football players. Twenty-four male community-level players were assessed on sprint acceleration (10-m time), maximum strength (3 repetition-maximum half squat), leg power (countermovement jump), reactive strength (drop jump), and a single COD speed test and a defensive agility test. Change-of-direction speed was correlated with reactive strength (r = -0.645, p = 0.001) and sprint acceleration (r = 0.510, p = 0.011). Multiple regression indicated that the combined physical qualities explained 56.7% of the variance associated with COD speed (adjusted R = 0.567, p ≤ 0.05). Participants were median split into faster and slower COD speed groups, and these were compared by independent t-tests. The faster group was significantly better (p ≤ 0.05) on the sprint acceleration and reactive strength tests (large effect size). The correlations between physical qualities and agility were trivial to small (r = -0.101 to 0.123, p > 0.05) and collectively explained only 14.2% of the variance associated with agility performance (adjusted R = -0.142, p > 0.05). When faster and slower agility groups were compared, there were trivial to moderate differences (p > 0.05) in all physical qualities. It was concluded that reactive strength and sprint acceleration are important for COD speed, but the physical qualities assessed are not associated with defensive agility performance. For agility tasks similar to those in this study, sprint and resistance training should not be emphasized, and training other factors, such as the development of sport-specific technique and cognitive skill, is recommended.

BACKGROUNDː Hamstring Strain Injuries (HSI) are among the most common injuries in field based team sports with a high speed running component. The implementation of the Nordic Hamstring Exercise (NHE) is a well documented method of improving eccentric hamstring strength to mitigate the risk of HSI occurance. Sprint training is specific to the injury mechanism and is thought to activate the hamstrings through maximal eccentric contractions. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of sprint training and the NHE on eccentric hamstring strength and sprint performance. METHODSː Twenty-eight participants (Mean ± SD age = 16.21 ± 1.34 years; height = 1.75m ± 0.10m; body mass = 68.5kg ± 12.1kg) completed an eccentric hamstring strength assessment and 40m sprint to assess acceleration and maximum speed. Participants were randomly allocated to either a NHE training or sprint training group. Two sessions per week for four-weeks of training was performed with baseline testing procedures repeated in the week following the intervention. Perceptions of soreness were recorded following the warmup in each training session. RESULTSː Both the NHE (effect size = 0.39, p < 0.05) and sprint training (effect size = 0.29, p <0.05) groups displayed significant gains in eccentric hamstring strength. The NHE group reported trivial improvements in sprint performance, whilst the sprint training group experienced a moderate improvement, specifically in maximum speed (ES = 0.83 Moderate). Sprint training also produced greater perceptions of soreness than the NHE following a fourweek training intervention, specifically before the start of the last session (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONSː These findings indicate that sprint training had a beneficial effect for both eccentric hamstring strength and sprint performance, whilst also producing greater soreness than the NHE following the final training session. It was concluded that a fourweek block of maximum speed training may have both an injury prevention and performance enhancement benefit.

There is currently a lack of consensus in the collection of injury/illness data, limiting the development of prevention programmes for combat sport as a whole. However, sport-specific data that identify body areas with high injury frequency can provide direction to clinicians, enabling them to focus their attention on developing pathologies in these areas. In doing so, clinicians can enhance the practical elements of their role within the integrated combat sport performance team and assist in the regular update of surveillance records.

Rowing requires strength, power, and strength-endurance for optimal performance. A rowing-based warm-up could be enhanced by exploiting the postactivation potentiation (PAP) phenomenon, acutely enhancing power output at the beginning of a race where it is needed most. Minimal research has investigated the effects of PAP on events of longer duration (i.e. 1,000-m rowing). The purpose of this research was to investigate the effects of PAP on 1,000-m rowing ergometer performance through the use of 2 different warm-up procedures: (a) a rowing warm-up combined with a series of isometric conditioning contractions, known as the potentiated warm-up (PW), and (b) a rowing warm-up only (NW). The isometric conditioning contractions in the PW were performed by "pulling" an immovable handle on the rowing ergometer, consisting of 5 sets of 5 seconds (2 seconds at submaximal intensity, and 3 seconds at maximal intensity), with a 15-second recovery between sets. The 1,000-m rowing ergometer time trial was performed after each warm-up condition, whereby mean power output, mean stroke rate, and split time were assessed every 100 m. Ten Australian national level rowers served as the subjects and performed both conditions in a counterbalanced order on separate days. The PW reduced 1,000-m time by 0.8% (p > 0.05). The PW improved mean power output by 6.6% (p < 0.01) and mean stroke rate by 5.2% (p < 0.01) over the first 500 m; resulting in a reduction of 500-m time by 1.9% (p < 0.01), compared with the NW. It appears that the inclusion of isometric conditioning contractions to the rowing warm-up enhance short-term rowing ergometer performance (especially at the start of a race) to a greater extent than a rowing warm-up alone.

Background/aimTo be fully effective, the prevention of injury in sport and promotion of athlete's health needs to be both targeted and underpinned by scientific evidence. This study aimed to identify the research priorities of International Sporting Federation (ISFs) compared to the current research focus of the International Olympic Committee Research Centres (IOC-RCs).MethodsOnline survey of ISF Medical Chairpersons (n=22, 69% response) and IOC-RC Directors (n=7, 78% response). Open-ended responses relating to injury/illness priorities and specific athlete targets were thematically coded. Ratings were given of the need for different research types according to the Translating Research into Injury Prevention Practice (TRIPP) Framework stages. Results are presented as the frequency of ISFs and IOC-RCs separately.ResultsBoth ISFs and IOC-RFs prioritised research into concussion (27%, 72%, respectively), competitive overuse (23%, 43%) and youth (41%, 43%). The ISFs also ranked catastrophic injuries (14%), environmental factors (18%), elite athletes (18%) and Paralympic athletes (14%) as important. The IOC-RCs gave higher priority to preventing respiratory illness (43%), long-term health consequences of injury (43%) and recreational athletes (43%). There was a trend towards ISFs valuing TRIPP stage 5/6 research more highly and for the IOC-RCs to value TRIPP stage 1/2 research.ConclusionsThere are clear opportunities to better link the priorities and actions of the ISFs and IOC-RCs, to ensure more effective practice-policy-research partnerships for the benefit of all athletes. Setting a mutually-agreed research agenda will require further active engagement between researchers and broader ISF representatives.

Agility is an important skill for both attackers and defenders in invasion sports such as codes of football. On the sporting field, agility requires reacting to a stimulus, often presented by an opponent’s movement, before a change of direction or speed. There is a plethora of research that examines the movement component of agility in isolation, which is described as change-of-direction (COD) ability, and this is thought to underpin agility performance. This opinion article proposes that COD ability should not be researched as the only or primary outcome measure when the objective is to inform agility performance in invasion sports. It is argued that pre-planned COD movements and tests lack ecological validity because they lack perception-action coupling and involve movement out of context from the game. The movement techniques and strength qualities required for the performance of COD tests can be quite different to those required for agility. It is suggested that COD tests can be applied to sports that involve pre-planned COD movements, but researchers should endeavour to use agility tests when studying invasion sports. Some new methods for assessing one-on-one agility contests are reported as potentially valuable for future research, and examples of research questions are provided.

Background As basketball match-play requires players to possess a wide range of physical characteristics, many tests have been introduced in the literature to identify talent and quantify fitness in various samples of players. However, a synthesis of the literature to identify the most frequently used tests, outcome variables, and normative values for basketball-related physical characteristics in adult male basketball players is yet to be conducted. Objective The primary objectives of this systematic review are to (1) identify tests and outcome variables used to assess physical characteristics in adult male basketball players across all competition levels, (2) report a summary of anthropometric, muscular power, linear speed, change-of-direction speed, agility, strength, anaerobic capacity, and aerobic capacity in adult male basketball players based on playing position and competition level, and (3) introduce a framework outlining recommended testing approaches to quantify physical characteristics in adult male basketball players. Methods A systematic review of MEDLINE, PubMed, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, and Web of Science was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines to identify relevant studies. To be eligible for inclusion, studies were required to: (1) be original research articles; (2) be published in a peer-reviewed journal; (3) have full-text versions available in the English language; and (4) include the primary aim of reporting tests used and/or the physical characteristics of adult (i.e., ≥ 18 years of age) male basketball players. Additionally, data from the top 10 draft picks who participated in the National Basketball Association combined from 2011–12 to 2020–21 were extracted from the official league website to highlight the physical characteristics of elite 19- to 24-year-old basketball players. Results A total of 1684 studies were identified, with 375 being duplicates. Consequently, the titles and abstracts of 1309 studies were screened and 231 studies were eligible for full-text review. The reference list of each study was searched, with a further 59 studies identified as eligible for review. After full-text screening, 137 studies identified tests, while 114 studies reported physical characteristics in adult male basketball players. Conclusions Physical characteristics reported indicate a wide range of abilities are present across playing competitions. The tests and outcome variables reported in the literature highlight the multitude of tests currently being used. Because there are no accepted international standards for physical assessment of basketball players, establishing normative data is challenging. Therefore, future testing should involve repeatable protocols that are standardised and provide outcomes that can be monitored across time. Recommendations for testing batteries in adult male basketball players are provided so improved interpretation of data can occur. Clinical Trial Registration This review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews and allocated registration number CRD42020187151 on 28 April, 2020.

PREVENTION OF SPORTS INJURIES IS A PRIORITY FOR SPORT STAKEHOLDERS ACROSS THE SPECTRUM OF TRAINING AND COMPETITION. ACHIEVING THIS OBJECTIVE REQUIRES A MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPROACH WITH STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING COACHES PLAYING AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN THE PROCESS. WHEN CONSIDERING SPORTS INJURY PREVENTION STRATEGIES, THE ROLE OF THE STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING COACH CAN EXTEND BEYOND OBSERVING EXERCISE TECHNIQUE AND PRESCRIBING TRAINING TO DEVELOP A ROBUST AND RESILIENT ATHLETE. THIS PAPER PROVIDES STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING COACHES WITH A BROAD OVERVIEW OF THE SPORTS INJURY PREVENTION PROCESS AND OUTLINES EXAMPLES OF HOW STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING COACHES CAN WORK TO PROMOTE AND IMPROVE ATHLETE SAFETY.