Time-motion analysis and physiological responses of small-sided team handball games in youth male players: Influence of player number

Abstract

Male team handball players covered a total distance of 3,627 ± 568 m (group means ± SD) per match with a total effective playing time of 53.9 ± 5.9 minutes, while full-time (60 minutes playing time) male handball players covered 3,945 ± 538 m. The mean speed was 6.40 ± 1.01 km ⋅ h -1 (Michalsik et al., 2013;.Mean heart rate and relative workload during male match play were 163 ± 5 beats ⋅ min -1 and 70.9 ± 6.0% of VO 2max , respectively. Post-match blood lactate concentration was 4.8 ± 1.9 mmol ⋅ L −1 (range: 2.8-10.8 mmol ⋅ L -1 ) (Michalsik et al., 2015b). Players showed 36.9 ± 13.1 (group mean ± SD) high-intense technical playing actions per match with a mean total effective playing time of 53.9 ± 5.9 minutes. In attack, each player performed 6.0 ± 5.2 fast breaks, received 34.5 ± 21.3 tackles in total, and in defense performed 3.7 ± 3.5 blockings, 3.9 ± 3.0 claspings, and 5.8 ± 3.6 hard tackles (Michalsik et al., 2015a).Background: Effective training depends on knowledge of a sport's requirements. Small-sided games (SSG) are a spontaneous form of specific training, where exercise intensity can be manipulated mainly by modifying external factors. In SSG the players develop technical and tactical skills in the similar situations, such as during a match and can also develop their physical skills. Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine the distance covered and physiological response of altering the number of youth male players during small-sided team handball games with modified rules. Methods: The subjects consisted of 12 male youth team handball players (age 16.6 ± 0.5 years) playing the first league for youth male players in the Czech Republic. The study was conducted during six weeks (one training session per week). Only three SSG were played in each training session. The SSG were played, first with five players on each side (5 vs. 5), then four (4 vs. 4), then three (3 vs. 3). Each game was four minutes long, followed by three minutes of passive rest. Results: The players covered the greatest distance (520.6 ± 61.4 m) in the SSG 3 vs. 3. There was a difference in the distance covered between players in the 3 vs. 3 SSG and the other SSG (4 vs. 4 and 5 vs. 5) (p = .041 and p = .043, respectively). In individual speed zones a difference occurred only in the first and third speed zone and always among the 3 vs. 3 and 5 vs. 5 SSG (p = .034 and p = .044), respectively. The highest average intensity (87.9 ± 4.8% HR max ) was in 3 vs. 3 SSG. Loading of the players in 5 vs. 5 was lower compared to 4 vs. 4 (p = .035) and 3 vs. 3 (p < .001). There was a difference in zone load intensity (> 90% HR max ) between 3 vs. 3 and 5 vs. 5 SSG (p = .041). Conclusions: These results indicate that changing the number of players during SSG with modified rules in youth team handball may be used to manipulate the physiological response during youth team handball training.

Effects of small-sided games vs. simulated match training on physical performance of youth female handball players

“…The profiles of game activity during handball games are determined by the complex interactions between players with and without the ball. A number of studies have been conducted to assess player workload during the games [ 5 , 8 , 13 , 32 ]. SMHT in the regular handball pitch tend to decrease the number of active technical actions and some players may have limited roles in the game [ 8 ].…”

“…A number of studies have been conducted to assess player workload during the games [ 5 , 8 , 13 , 32 ]. SMHT in the regular handball pitch tend to decrease the number of active technical actions and some players may have limited roles in the game [ 8 ]. Since the players are likely to have less involvement with the ball in this format, they are required to spend time by taking less active action in offensive and defensive actions.…”

“…These situations are usually developed in pitches with several sizes, involving different number of players and often played under different types of rules changes when compared to the official formal match [ 7 ]. Previous studies have shown that the physical responses and technical skills requirements during SSG can be modified by manipulating several constraints, such as the size of the pitch, number of players, rules of the game and coach encouragement [ 1 , 8 , 9 ]. Generally, SSG with higher number of players are used to train players’ tactical behaviors, while larger playing area in SSG formats are more appropriate to increase distance covered by players and high-intensity efforts [ 10 ].…”

“…Currently, there is only a small amount of data on the effectiveness of game-based training in handball. Nevertheless, there have been some attempts to study the effects of SSG on physical [ 1 , 4 , 8 , 12 ], physiological [ 22 ], and tactical performance [ 10 ], showing that the manipulation of task constraints may lead to the emergence of different interpersonal relationships between players and opponents and, consequently, different physical and tactical performances. We therefore hypothesized that following SSG (2vs2, 3vs3, 4vs4) training protocol the fitness identification measurements would indicate a greater improvement of physical performance and game activity profiles then simulated match handball training (SMHT).…”

Differences in situational power performance between playing positions in top level handball

“…Analysis of handball technical activity reveals that power abilities are most important for efficient performance (Hespanhol et al, 2012, Póvoas et al, 2012. Power in handball is manifested through jumps, shots, and sprinting (Alvarenga et al 2014;Michalsik and Aagaard, 2015;Bělka et al 2016).…”