An analysis of external load on different pitch surfaces in Scottish professional football: using global positioning system to analyse match play and training

Taylor, Alastair (2019) An analysis of external load on different pitch surfaces in Scottish professional football: using global positioning system to analyse match play and training. MSc(R) thesis, University of Glasgow.

Full text available as:
[thumbnail of 2019TaylorMSc(R).pdf] PDF
Download (1MB)
Printed Thesis Information:


Aim: To investigate the external loads experienced during match play and training, on grass and artificial turf

Hypothesis: No differences will exist between grass and artificial turf, in both training and match play.

Methods: Using Global Positioning System (GPS), Distance covered (m.min-1), Player
Load (AU.min-1) and High Speed Running (m.min-1) were recorded during match play and training (Small-sided games (SSGs)) from two teams in the Scottish Professional Football League. SSGs on the same surface were compared together, before SSGs of similar playing area were analysed across surfaces. This created a “small SSG” (grass 4v4 vs AT 5v5, 7v7 & 8v8) and a “large SSG” (Grass 9v9 vs AT 9v9, 10v10 & 11v11) comparison.

Results: During match play, no differences were shown in any of the three metrics
(Distance Covered - 111.46±11.78m.min-1 vs 110.99±10.55 m.min-1 vs 112±13.48 m.min-1 (p=0.922), HSR – 10.13±3.42m.min-1 vs 10.21±3.13 m.min-1 vs 12.14±4.18 m.min-1 (p=0.076), Player Load – 10.2±1.36AU.min-1 vs 10.42±1.5AU.min-1 vs 11.2±1.26AU.min-1 (p=0.391). (Grass vs ATHome vs ATAway) Data = mean±95% CI). On Grass (4v4 vs 9v9), significant differences were observed for HSR only between SSGs, (Distance Covered – 107.62±4.15m.min-1 vs 111.47±5.61m.min-1 (p=0.277), HSR – 7.54±246m.min-1 vs 8.875±1.521m.min-1 (p=0.002), Player Load – 11.48±0.548AU.min-1 vs 11.313±0.739AU.min-1 (p=0.72)). On AT, p values of <0.005 were obtained for all three metrics (5v5 vs 7v7 vs 8v8 vs 9v9 vs 10v10 vs 11v11). Distance Covered – 104.37±14.93m.min-1 vs 104.77±7.29m.min-1 vs 95.32±17.23m.min-1 vs 94.63±14.6m.min-1 vs 109.31±17.14m.min-1 vs 108.74±3.64m.min-1, HSR – 3.54±2.97m.min-1 vs 5.57±2.18m.min-1 vs 2.63±2.59m.min-1 vs 2.52±2.23m.min-1 vs 5.85±3.8m.min-1 vs
8.76±4.92m.min-1, Player Load – 11.57±2.12AU.min-1 vs 9.995±0.89AU.min-1 vs3
10.158±2.17AU.min-1 vs 10.21±1.95AU.min-1 vs 11.27±2.52AU.min-1 vs
10.43±2.05AU.min-1. In the “small SSG” comparison, grass 4v4 was different from the AT 8v8 on all metrics (p<0.005). In the “large SSG” comparison, the grass 9v9 was different from the AT 9v9 on all metrics (p<0.005).

Conclusions: Differences in external load across grass and AT are found in training
between some SSG variations of similar playing area, but not in match play.

Item Type: Thesis (MSc(R))
Qualification Level: Masters
Keywords: Football, small-sided games, SSGs, surface, artificial turf, GPS, external load, match play, training.
Subjects: Q Science > QP Physiology
Colleges/Schools: College of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences > School of Life Sciences
Supervisor's Name: MacFarlane, Dr. Niall
Date of Award: 2019
Depositing User: Mr Alastair Taylor
Unique ID: glathesis:2019-74412
Copyright: Copyright of this thesis is held by the author.
Date Deposited: 24 Oct 2019 12:52
Last Modified: 10 Dec 2019 10:34
Thesis DOI: 10.5525/gla.thesis.74412

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item


Downloads per month over past year