The influence of playing surface on physiological and performance responses during and after soccer simulation

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of playing surface on physiological and performance responses during and in the 48 h after simulated soccer match play. Blood lactate, single-sprint, repeated-sprint and agility of eight amateur soccer players were assessed throughout a 90-min soccer-simulation protocol (SSP) completed on natural turf (NT) and artificial turf. Counter-movement jump, multiple-rebound jump, sprint (10 m, 60 m), L-agility run (L-AR), creatine kinase (CK) and perception of muscle soreness (PMS) were measured before, immediately after, 24 h and 48 h after exercise. Analyses revealed significant changes in blood lactate and single-sprint performance (both P < 0.05) during the SSP but with no significant differences between surfaces. Conversely, repeated-sprint performance demonstrated an interaction effect, with reductions in performance evident on NT only (P < 0.05). Whilst L-AR and 10-m sprint performance remained unchanged, 60-m sprint and multiple-rebound jump performance were impaired, and PMS and CK were elevated immediately following the SSP (all P < 0.05) but with no surface effects. Although performance, CK and PMS were negatively affected to some degree in the 48 h after the SSP, there was no surface effect. For the artificial and natural surfaces used in the present study, physiological and performance responses to simulated soccer match play appear to be similar. Whilst a potential for small differences in performance response exists during activity, surface type does not affect the pattern of recovery following simulated match play.

Effects of Playing Surface on Physical, Physiological, and Perceptual Responses to a Repeated-Sprint Ability Test: Natural Grass Versus Artificial Turf

“…During competitive games, Andersson et al 10 observed similar running (e.g., sprint number, high-intensity running and total covered distance) and technical (e.g., standing tackles) patterns on AT compared to NG. Moreover, single sprint performance, 11 as well as jumping and agility performances 12,13 appear to be similar on AT and NG during a soccer-simulation protocol. On the other hand, the effect of playing surface on repeated sprint ability (RSA), on the other hand is equivocal.…”

Influence of competition on performance factors in under-19 soccer players at national league level

“…In addition, there is an acute effect on the isometric strength of the associated hamstrings during knee flexion [39], a basic movement in jump technique. This post-match fatigue remains significant 24 hours post-match for this test [7], and in most cases there is no functional recovery until the 72 hours post-match [35,38]. However, Stone et al [35] found no significant differences in this decline in their study.…”

“…This post-match fatigue remains significant 24 hours post-match for this test [7], and in most cases there is no functional recovery until the 72 hours post-match [35,38]. However, Stone et al [35] found no significant differences in this decline in their study. It should be noted that age could also be a factor in this test, because although the effect of fatigue has been elucidated in young players [40].…”

“…Carlin et al [34] have argued that speed tests may be more appropriate than jump tests to assess performance and fatigue. Recently, it has been demonstrated that performance of a short sprint (10-20 m) in a straight line lacks sensitivity as an indicator of physical fatigue immediately post-match [35]. Such a short distance does not alter times but does affect hip biomechanics, with changes in flexion and extension angles [36].…”

“…Such a short distance does not alter times but does affect hip biomechanics, with changes in flexion and extension angles [36]. Nagahara et al [37] have suggested using running distances in excess of 30 m in order to improve assessment of the effect of post-match fatigue on soccer players' maximum speed capacity, and obtained differences in this capacity (p = 0.038) when they used a distance of 35 m. However, this effect of fatigue has also been demonstrated using distances of up to 60 m [35]. Our results for all playing positions except goalkeepers and all distances (10, 30 and 40 m) indicate a statistically significant decline in performance between the start and end of the match and between half-time and the end.…”