Examination of Coach and Player Perceptions of Recovery and Exertion

Abstract

TL estimates were strongly correlated with Edwards' TL regardless of information source (coach or athlete) or time point (SRPE-CI TL or SRPE-CO TL). Results suggest coaches' perceptions validly indicated TL. Coaches' perceptions provide parallel information (correlated strongly with Edwards TL), but not identical information (demonstrated by differences in SRPE) as athlete perceptions. Differences in perceived recovery indicate coaches overestimate recovery when compared to athletes' perceptions.

Using differential ratings of perceived exertion to assess agreement between coach and player perceptions of soccer training intensity: An exploratory investigation

“…Comparing our data to previous literature is difficult due to the different methodological approaches, yet previous research (Brink et al, 2014;Kraft et al, 2018;Doeven et al, 2017;Scantlebury et al, 2018) has shown that coach prescribed and observed sRPE scores differ from player reported sRPE; however, by differentiating ratings of perceived exertion our study found some evidence for agreement between coach observed and player reported technical exertion. That aside, our data were in line with previous research showing the agreement between coaches' and players' perception of training intensity in team sports to be weaker than in individual sports (Foster et al, 2001b;Wallace et al, 2009).…”

“…Coaches must be able to accurately prescribe training loads in the context of the desired outcomes as incongruence between coach prescribed and player reported loads could expose players to training maladaptation (Scantlebury et al, 2018). Research investigating differences between coach prescribed and player reported internal training loads, as reported by a session ratings of perceived exertion (sRPE), is equivocal as coaches both underestimate and overestimate sRPE during team sport training (Brink et al, 2014;Kraft et al, 2018;Doeven et al, 2017;Scantlebury et al, 2018). Such differences are important as consistent coach underestimation of player internal training load could result in negative consequences of training such as overreaching, illness or injury; whereas, coach overestimation of player internal training load could result in the under preparation of players for the demands of match-play (Brink and Frencken, 2018).…”

“…In previous work (Brink et al, 2014;Kraft et al, 2018;Doeven et al, 2017;Scantlebury et al, 2018), training load was represented by the sRPE score which may not be sensitive to the stochastic demands of soccer training (Weston, 2013). Alternatively, differential ratings of Although this problem has long been acknowledged in sports science research (Winter, 2005), recent work within psychology has provided a robust framework for undertaking and quantifying RPE familiarisation (Borg, 2013;Borg and Love, 2017).…”

Factors Influencing the Association Between Coach and Athlete Rating of Exertion: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

“…Though athletes' RPE and their pre-training perceived level of wellness may not be closely related, it is an important consideration for examining the possible mismatch that occurs between athlete and coach. In a separate study, Kraft et al [10] showed an overall correlation of r = 0.25 (range r = 0.13 to 0.38) between coaches and athletes' perception of athlete recovery (using the perceived recovery status scale), across different sports (volleyball, soccer, basketball). Practically, a mismatch as evidenced by a higher rating of perceived recovery values may have led to the coach overestimating the difficulty of a task in relation to external cues (i.e., exterior signs of athlete effort may have been misinterpreted due to an incorrect notion of recovery) [10].…”

“…Overall, the percentage of agreement was larger in the Transformation Phase (64%) compared with the tapering phase (42%). In the study by Kraft et al [10], multi-sports were analyzed where it was shown that men's and women's basketball were examined at the beginning of the season and soccer and volleyball were observed near the end of their competitive seasons [10] with data collected for only 1-2 weeks. Both of these factors may in part explain the lower correlations they reported, along with the fact they had four different coaches involved and this may explain the variability in the association between sports.…”