GPS AND INJURY PREVENTION
SOCCER
FABIAN E. EHRMANN,1 CRAIG S. DUNCAN,2 DOUNGKAMOL SINDHUSAKE,3 WILLIAM N. FRANZSEN,4 AND
DAVID A. GREENE1
1
Department of Health Science, School of Exercise Science, Australian Catholic University, Sydney, Australia; 2Football
Federation Australia, Sydney, Australia; 3Medical Imaging, School of Medicine, The University of Western Sydney, Sydney,
Australia; and 4Department of Education and Arts, School of Arts, Australian Catholic University, Sydney, Australia
ABSTRACT
Ehrmann, FE, Duncan, CS, Sindhusake, D, Franzsen, WN,
and Greene, DA. GPS and injury prevention in professional
soccer. J Strength Cond Res 30(2): 360–367, 2016—This
study investigated the relationship between GPS variables
measured in training and gameplay and injury occurrences in
professional soccer. Nineteen professional soccer players
competing in the Australian Hyundai A-League were moni-
tored for 1 entire season using 5 Hz Global Positioning
System (GPS) units (SPI-Pro GPSports) in training sessions
and preseason games. The measurements obtained were
total distance, high-intensity running distance, very–high-
intensity running distance, new body load, and meters
per minute. Noncontact soft tissue injuries were docu-
mented throughout the season. Players’ seasons were aver-
aged over 1- and 4-week blocks according to when injuries
occurred. These blocks were compared with each other and
with players’ seasonal averages. Players performed signifi-
cantly higher meters per minute in the weeks preceding an
injury compared with their seasonal averages (+9.6 and
+7.4% for 1- and 4-week blocks, respectively) (p , 0.01),
indicating an increase in training and gameplay intensity
leading up to injuries. Furthermore, injury blocks showed
significantly lower average new body load compared with
seasonal averages (215.4 and 29.0% for 1- and 4-week
blocks, respectively) (p , 0.01 and p = 0.01). Periods of
relative underpreparedness could potentially leave players
unable to cope with intense bouts of high-intensity efforts
during competitive matches. Although limited by Fédération
Internationale de Football Association regulations, the re-
sults of this study isolated 2 variables predicting soft tissue
Address correspondence to Fabian E. Ehrmann, fabian.ehrmann@acu.
edu.au.
30(2)/360–367
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Ó 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association
360
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
IN PROFESSIONAL
injuries for coaches and sports scientists to consider when
planning and monitoring training.
KEY WORDS Athlete monitoring, training load, fatigue
INTRODUCTION
T
he use of Global Positioning Software (GPS) tech-
nology to measure players’ training loads has
become prevalent in professional soccer (36).
The major focus of GPS use has been to identify
the activity profiles of players in training or trial matches
(36). However, in recent times, there has been increasing
interest in using GPS to maintain the balance between train-
ing stress and recovery, thereby maximizing performance
potential while minimizing the risk of overtraining (25,27).
To date, no study has examined the link between GPS var-
iables and noncontact soft tissue injuries in professional soc-
cer players.
Players in European competitions miss on average 37 days
in a 300-day season through injury (12), which presents
a significant financial burden on professional soccer clubs
and can severely damage their chances of success (1,21).
The epidemiology of injuries in professional soccer has been
well documented, with studies reporting that elite soccer
players are at high risk of injury during training and even
more so during match play (12,22). Most injuries sustained
are soft tissue injuries, particularly strains to the thigh region
(11), with some figures showing that up to 59% of injuries
sustained were noncontact (22).
Furthermore, recent research has suggested a general
increase in injury risk (2), or increased injury risks during
match play (9), when players have less than 4 days to recover
between matches, indicating that residual fatigue can impact
injury rates significantly. To prevent fatigue-related injuries, it
is essential to monitor the training load of players (23,25). A
number of methods have been used to assess the effect of
training on fatigue, including the monitoring of heart rate
(23), heart rate variability (30) and hormonal levels (28).
Moreover, session-RPE (13) has been used extensively and
is identified as a reliable and valid measure of internal training
load (24,33). Increases in session-RPE–based training loads
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

between GPS variables and

other training load measure-
TABLE 1. All session splits, as well as split start and finish.
ments has been explored. Total
Session Beginning of split End of split distance, distances measured at
various intensities, and Body
Training session Beginning of warm-up lap Player leaving pitch
Load have been shown to cor-
Preseason game Kick off; player substituted on End of half; player substituted
off relate significantly with subjec-
Pregame warm-up Start of warm-up routine Player leaving pitch tive session-RPE–based training
loads (6,20,32).
However, the potential link
between GPS training load
measurements and injury risk
in soccer is still unclear.
Gabbett and Ullah (19) estab-
TABLE 2. GPS variables measured in this study, their units, and zones.* lished a correlation between
injury risk and high-intensity
Variable Unit Zone running efforts during training
Total distance covered (TD) Meters sessions in rugby league,
High-intensity running (HIR) Meters 14.3–19.7 km$h21 whereas Nielsen et al. (29)
Very–high-intensity running (VHIR) Meters Above 19.7 km$h21 noted that novice runners were
Meters per minute (MpM) Meters per minute more susceptible to injuries
New total body load (BL)* Arbitrary units when weekly total distance
*New body load is the accumulation of forces measured by a triaxial accelerometer in the increased by more than 30%,
GPS units sampling at 100 Hz. although these results were sta-
tistically nonsignificant.
At present, there are no
studies to our knowledge that
have demonstrated a relationship with increased injury risk in have investigated the relationship between GPS variables
elite youth soccer (5) and other sports such as Australian and soft tissue injury in professional soccer over a full season.
Football (31) and Rugby League (15,16). Thus, the aim of this study was to examine the link between
In recent years, soccer teams have made use of GPS tracking GPS variables and noncontact soft tissue injuries in pro-
devices to provide an objective measure of external training fessional soccer players. We hypothesize that GPS will be
load (36). GPS units have been shown to be sufficiently reliable effective in identifying potential injury risk and that specific
and accurate to quantify training workloads in team sports variables will be identified to enhance future practice in the
(8,34) and have been successfully used in Australian Rules applied setting.
Football and Rugby League for several years. Most studies
using GPS in soccer have focussed on movement patterns METHODS
during match and training activities. However, the relationship Experimental Approach to the Problem
In this observational study, 19
elite soccer players’ external
training load data were moni-
tored using 5 Hz GPS units
(SPI-Pro GPSports, Canberra,
Australia). Data were collected
for 1 entire competitive season,
spanning 37 weeks, from July
18, 2011 to March 30, 2012 (11
weeks preseason, 26 weeks in-
season). Injuries were recorded
and data retrospectively analyzed
to identify potential risk factors.

Subjects
Figure 1. Comparisons conducted between individuals’ workload blocks. Nineteen full time professional
male soccer players (25.7 6 5.1

VOLUME 30 | NUMBER 2 | FEBRUARY 2016 | 361

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 GPS and Injury Prevention in Professional Soccer

duty. Three pregame training

sessions conducted away from
the team’s training ground
were not recorded because of
logistical difficulties. Players
also wore GPS units during
every preseason game and
warm-up (n = 8), albeit, due to
Fédération Internationale de
Football Association (FIFA)
regulations not during competi-
tive matches. GPS data were
downloaded immediately after
every session or game and ana-
lyzed using GPSports Team
AMS software (GPSports). Ses-
sions were split individually and
session splits are shown in
Figure 2. Significant difference (p = 0.008) between meters per minute (m$min21) before injury and the season
Table 1.
average (data are mean 6 SE for 1-week blocks).
The GPS variables collected
are shown in Table 2. The
selection of these variables al-
years; age range 18–33 years; 181.0 6 4.8 cm; 77.3 6 4.2 kg) lows the comparative study of players’ workloads with other
competing in the Australian Hyundai A-League participated studies that describe running patterns in soccer using com-
in this study. Written informed consent was obtained from puterized tracking systems (3,4). New body load was
all subjects and the Australian Catholic University’s ethics included to give a measure of accelerations and
committee approved the study. decelerations.
Injuries were documented according to FIFA outlines (14),
Data Collection but only noncontact soft tissue injuries that prohibited the
Players wore their allocated GPS units for every training injured player from participating in at least 1 match were
session of the year, including recovery sessions and extra included to target injuries, which have a higher possibility of
training, which did not include the whole squad. Exceptions being prevented. If an injury could not be pinpointed to a game
were players who were injured or away on national team or training session (e.g., if a player complained about pain occur-
ring in prior weeks), it was
excluded from the analysis. Play-
ers were assessed for fatigue and
signs of overtraining before every
training session and match
to minimize injury risks. These
assessments included the use of
questionnaires (23,25), hormonal
markers (28), and Heart Rate
Variability (30).

Competitive Game Data

During the season, the team
competed in 28 matches in
which they were not allowed
to wear GPS units. Australian
soccer clubs and stadiums do
not have computerized track-
ing systems, such as AMISCO
Figure 3. Significant difference (p = 0.008) between meters per minute (m$min21) before injury and the season Pro or ProZone, which moni-
average (data are mean 6 SE for 4-week blocks). tor players’ in-game workloads.
Therefore, game data in this

362
the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

previously published data for

soccer players in the A-League
(35,36).
Data for youth/reserve team
matches in which players
included in this study partici-
pated were derived with the
same method.
Statistical Analyses
All GPS variables were retro-
spectively analyzed by averag-
ing individual players’ data
across 1 and 4 weeks leading
up to an injury (injury block),
averaging values across 1 and 4
weeks before the injury block
(preinjury block) as well as aver-
Figure 4. Significant difference (p = 0.006) between new body load (arbitrary units) before injury and the season aging values from the beginning
average (data are mean 6 SE for 1-week blocks). of the season to the point of
injury (season average). This
approach served to simplify the
study were not measured but derived from game data collected data and reflected the practical nature of this inves-
collected preseason. Players who completed at least 1 full tigation, as moving averages are commonly used in elite sports
half in a preseason game were categorized according to to track changes in athletes’ training patterns. A player’s indi-
position and positional averages were then calculated for vidual blocks were compared with each other, to determine
in-game workloads. These averages were extrapolated workload differences before injuries occurred (Figure 1).
according to playing time to derive players’ competitive in- A significant difference in a GPS measure between injury
game workloads. and preinjury blocks as well as injury blocks and season
Although not specific to match location, quality of oppo- averages was assessed using analysis of variance with
sition, phase of the season or game status, 8 matches against repeated measures design.
high class opposition and played under varying conditions To reflect the practical nature of the collected data, Cohen’s
were included in these calculations. Results closely matched effect sizes (where h2 = sum of square [between the preinjury
and injury blocks or injury
blocks and season averages]/
total sum of square) (26) were
calculated. Effect sizes were
classified according to Cohen’s
rule of thumb (0.02 = small,
0.13 = medium, 0.26 = large
(7)). Per cent changes of magni-
tude were also calculated.
SPSS statistics version 19 for
Windows (IBM) was used to
analyze the data and a level of
significance was set at 0.05 for
all hypothesis testing.

RESULTS
A total of 16 injuries to 11
players fulfilled the criteria in
this study and were subse-
Figure 5. Significant difference (p = 0.01) between new body load (arbitrary units) before injury and the season quently analyzed. Three of
average (data are mean 6 SE for 4-week blocks). these injuries were sustained in
preseason, whereas 11 injuries

VOLUME 30 | NUMBER 2 | FEBRUARY 2016 | 363

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 GPS and Injury Prevention in Professional Soccer

TABLE 3. Mean (SE) of the measurements for 1- and 4-week blocks leading up to and including the day of injury
compared with the seasonal average for both 1- and 4-week blocks, with p values and effect sizes.*†

Injury block Season average p Effect size

1-Week blocks
Total distance 6511.52 (345.56) 7103.74 (149.56) 0.06 0.30
HIR distance 784.60 (73.98) 811.02 (45.61) 0.63 0.02
VHIR distance 276.81 (35.74) 271.59 (22.61) 0.86 ,0.001
New body load 133.07 (8.44) 158.82 (8.49) 0.006† 0.54
Meters per minute 89.00 (3.53) 80.99 (1.46) 0.008† 0.52
4-Week blocks
Total distance 6847.97 (199.20) 7137.87 (168.60) 0.09 0.31
HIR distance 822.86 (49.34) 830.53 (49.37) 0.73 0.02
VHIR distance 308.15 (30.86) 280.29 (25.06) 0.07 0.35
New body load 142.93 (5.36) 158.51 (8.04) 0.01† 0.58
Meters per minute 88.28 (2.58) 82.12 (1.49) 0.008† 0.61

*HIR = High-intensity running; VHIR = Very–high-intensity running.

†p # 0.05.

occurred during competition matches. Injuries were spread
evenly across the season, with a slight peak midway through
the season (6 of 16 injuries occurred in December and
January). Hamstring strains were the most common injury
included in this study (n = 4), followed by calf strains (n = 3),
ankle sprains (n = 3), and groin strains (n = 2).
Injured players completed significantly higher meters
per minute in the injury block compared with the Season
Average for both 1- and 4-week blocks (p = 0.008 for both
comparisons) as shown in Figures 2 and 3.
Injured players’ mean new body load was significantly
reduced in injury blocks compared with the Season Average
for both 1- and 4-week blocks (p = 0.006 and p = 0.01,
respectively) as shown in Figures 4 and 5.
No other GPS variables compared between injury blocks
and the Season Average yielded significant results. Similarly,
comparisons between preinjury blocks and injury blocks
yielded no significant results. Mean 6 SE for all block com-
parisons conducted in this study, along with their p-values
and effect sizes are shown in Tables 3 and 4.
Large effect sizes (effect size .0.26) were observed for
total distance, new body load and meters per minute in both
1- and 4-week blocks, as well as for very–high-intensity run-
ning distance in 4-week blocks.

TABLE 4. Mean (SE) of the measurements for 1- and 4-week blocks leading up to and including the day of injury
compared with the 1- and 4-week blocks before that, with p values and effect sizes.*

Preinjury block Injury block p Effect size

1-Week blocks
Total distance 7475.53 (263.56) 6511.52 (345.56) 0.08 0.27
HIR distance 907.09 (55.50) 784.60 (73.98) 0.22 0.15
VHIR distance 362.67 (45.79) 276.80 (35.74) 0.17 0.18
New body load 157.35 (7.48) 133.07 (8.44) 0.06 0.31
Meters per minute 87.55 (1.64) 89.00 (3.52) 0.65 0.02
4-Week blocks
Total distance 6952.24 (278.19) 6847.81 (199.20) 0.67 0.02
HIR distance 796.15 (57.85) 822.86 (49.34) 0.60 0.04
VHIR distance 274.92 (30.47) 308.15 (30.86) 0.32 0.12
New body load 145.86 (6.46) 142.92 (5.36) 0.60 0.04
Meters per minute 84.22 (2.22) 88.28 (2.58) 0.14 0.25

*HIR = High-intensity running; VHIR = Very–high-intensity running.

364
the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

TABLE 5. Per cent change in magnitude (SE) in all variables for both 1- and 4-week blocks.*†

1 Week 4 Week

Preinjury vs. injury Injury vs. season Preinjury vs. injury Injury vs. season

Total distance 11.15 (6.87) 8.52 (3.96) 0.71 (3.58) 3.99 (2.15)
HIR distance 10.48 (10.63) 3.63 (6.26) 26.11 (7.27) 0.64 (2.61)
VHIR distance 0.94 (0.79) 22.05 (9.65) 20.55 (0.45) 210.82 (5.09)
New body load 13.71 (6.74) 15.40 (4.19) 1.20 (3.95) 9.04 (2.82)
Meters per minute 21.62 (3.46) 29.58 (2.84) 25.10 (3.08) 27.44 (2.15)

*HIR = High-intensity running; VHIR = Very–high-intensity running.

†Calculation for per cent change in a specified measurement (e.g., total distance) between the 2 periods: % change in total
distance = ([Preinjury or season average 2 injury block] 3 100)/preinjury or season average.

Per cent changes in magnitude for all block comparisons
are shown in Table 5.
DISCUSSION
This study identified 2 GPS variables as potential noncontact
soft tissue injury predictors: average meters per minute and
average new body load. Average meters per minute
increased significantly by 9.6 and 7.4% from the season
average blocks to injury blocks for 1 and 4 weeks, respec-
tively, indicating a general increase in intensity during
sessions leading up to injuries. These findings are similar to
those made by Gabbett (15), who established a link between
increased training intensity and injury occurrences in rugby
league. Similarly, previous studies have established a correla-
tion between high training loads and injury occurrences in
team sports (16,31) using Foster’s Session RPE method—
a product of training duration (volume) and rate of perceived
exertion (intensity). Furthermore, research has found that it
is an increase in training load and not necessarily a high load
itself that increases players’ injury risks (31).
To date, no link has been established between session RPE
training load and meters per minute during sessions in team
sports. However, it is not surprising that average meters
per minute increased before the occurrence of injury as it is
the only variable that demonstrated a real measure of session
intensity with respect to duration. Increases in meters
per minute across a period of sessions reveal an increase in
intensity, even if the overall training load remains relatively
constant, as indicated by nonsignificant changes of total
distance or high-intensity running distances. This may be the
case during periods of the season when matches are played
more frequently, allowing for less recovery time between
matches and potentially increasing players’ injury risks (2).
Absolute training load may remain constant or only change
slightly, as coaches try to allow for recovery by shortening
sessions, not decreasing intensity. The result is an increase in
average intensity across sessions, potentially leaving players
unable to adapt or recover adequately.
Similarly, increased meters per minute during sessions
could also be explained by coaches shortening breaks in
between training drills, thereby increasing training density
and potentially saving valuable training time. This could
explain meters per minute increasing while high-intensity
running distances remain constant or even decrease slightly.
Such decreases in rest time in between drills are risk factors
themselves and will lead to increases in meters per minute
across the entire squad.
Although coaches shortening rest periods during training
sessions is conceivable as a contributing factor toward injury
occurrences during the collection period of this study, it was
not an aspect considered at the outset of data collection.
However, no conscious efforts by coaches to increase training
density at certain stages of the season were observed.
Results also demonstrated that players averaged signifi-
cantly less new body load in blocks leading up to an injury
compared with their seasonal averages, 15.4 and 9.0% for 1-
and 4-week blocks, respectively. This initially seems in
contrast to previous research suggesting that increased
training loads lead to injuries. However, recent studies have
highlighted that some modes of training in team sports can
leave players underprepared for the demands of competition
play in Rugby League (17) and women’s soccer (18). Eleven
of 16 injuries investigated in this study occurred in match
play. A period of relative undertraining during the week(s)
leading up to a match, as signified by a lower average new
body load, could leave players unable to perform the high
number of accelerations and decelerations required during
competition play. Variations in match intensity during a sea-
son, depending on opposition or score, e.g., could exaggerate
such an “underpreparedness effect” (10).
A particular focus of this research into differences between
training and match play intensities has been repeated bouts
of very–high-intensity work or sprints. New body load is the
only variable included in this study, which reflects these
bouts, as new body load incorporates every force measured
by the triaxial accelerometer sampling at 100 Hz within the

VOLUME 30 | NUMBER 2 | FEBRUARY 2016 | 365

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 GPS and Injury Prevention in Professional Soccer
GPS unit. The actual GPS variables included in this study
may not be sensitive enough to measure any underprepared-
ness, as they do not include many energy demanding actions
performed in soccer such as jumping, slide tackling, and
accelerating and decelerating. Investigating accelerations
and decelerations measured by displacement of the GPS unit
itself, as opposed to by the accelerometer within the unit,
could confirm these findings. However, accelerations and
decelerations were not included in this study due to con-
cerns over the accuracy and reliability of these variables
measured by the 5 Hz GPS units used (34).
Another possible explanation for players averaging a lower
new body load in the weeks leading up to an injury is that
they may feel pain, soreness, or fatigue already and therefore
“take it easy” during training sessions before breaking down
due to the high-intensity demands during a game.
The concept of players playing when in pain or already
injured, without necessarily informing physiotherapists,
doctors, or coaches at their clubs, is not new and for a variety
of reasons commonplace in soccer (25). This can lead to
players purposely pacing themselves in training sessions,
avoiding strenuous changes of direction and high-intensity
accelerations, while running more at a steady pace to keep
the overall distance covered high. In an intense competition
match, the opportunities to adequately pace oneself to cover
for an already existing problem are severely limited, and
players can break down as a result of this.
The theory of players purposely pacing themselves best
explains the paradox of having one variable—meters
per minute—considerably higher leading up to injuries,
whereas another—new body load—is considerably lower.
However, every effort was made to minimize injury risks for
the players participating in this study. Players were monitored
for fatigue before every training session and game through the
use of several tests. If doubts still persisted, players were then
assessed and cleared for full training by physiotherapists. This
made it unlikely that players trained while injured or in an
injury susceptible state. It also explains the relatively low num-
ber of soft tissue injury instances in this study.
An increase in training density, i.e., a decrease in rest times
while drill times remain constant throughout a training
session, could also explain these training load patterns
leading up to injuries. Decreased rest times in between
training drills might therefore be considered a contributing
factor toward soft tissue injury occurrences.
Natural variations in training load occurring over the
course of the season create an obstacle when the findings of
this study are applied in a practical setting. The question of
how many times players showed significantly higher meters
per minute or significantly lower new body load in blocks
compared with their respective season averages without
getting injured warrants further investigation. In the high-
pressure environment of professional soccer, coaches are
often inclined to risk players when results are needed. It is of
importance to know how great the injury risk is to a player
366
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
when he plays or trains when his GPS values are doubtful
and to be able to assess whether he can be risked or not.
Further risk assessment of similar data is needed to help
maintain a balance between a player’s health and safety and
a club’s urge to succeed. However, the lack of existing def-
inite injury prediction models should not deter clubs from
using motion tracking techniques to monitor players’ work-
loads as, at the elite level, a set of GPS units plus a full time
analyst, will only cost a fraction of an injured player’s income
per week.
The need for an individual approach to injury prevention
using GPS technology is apparent and it is important to
distinguish between nonmodifiable risk factors, such as age
or injury history, and modifiable risk factors. The patterns in
GPS data leading up to injuries observed in this study can
justifiably be considered in the latter category.
This study was limited by FIFA and FFA regulations
prohibiting the use of GPS units in competition play and 28
of 250 sessions were predicted and not measured. Because of
the lack of infrastructure in Australian stadiums, soccer
teams cannot use automated camera tracking systems and it
is important to conduct similar studies in countries that do
use such systems. GPS systems have also developed
markedly since the commencement of this study, with units
now offering higher sampling rates and analysis software
providing more and maybe more relevant variables, which
warrant investigation. A more sophisticated approach to the
statistical analysis in this study could also help refine the
results presented.
In conclusion, this study identified 2 GPS variables that
were related to noncontact soft tissue injuries in professional
soccer. A significant increase in meters per minute across
1- or 4-week blocks, as well as a significant decrease in new
body load across 1- and 4-week blocks predisposed soccer
players to injury. Many questions still remain and further
research is required to investigate if additional GPS variables
have a relationship with noncontact soft tissue injuries in
professional soccer players.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
This study has found 2 variables that deserve particular
attention when monitoring soccer players with GPS units
for the purpose of injury prevention. These are average
meters per minute, when significantly increased compared
with the Season Average (9.6 and 7.4% for 1- and 4-week
blocks, respectively), and average new body load, when
significantly decreased compared with the season average
(15.4 and 9.0% for 1- and 4-week blocks, respectively). Both
variables have been found to be predictors of the non-
contact soft tissue injuries investigated in this study and
should therefore be considered modifiable risk factors to
soccer players’ soft tissue injuries. Meters per minute and
new body load warrant extra consideration when training
sessions are retrospectively analyzed and future training
sessions are planned.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank Wai-Leng Wong for her contribution to
this work.
REFERENCES
1. Arnason, A, Sigurdsson, SB, Gudmundsson, A, Holme, I,
Engebretsen, L, and Bahr, R. Physical fitness, injuries, and team
performance in soccer. Med Sci Sports Exerc 36: 278–285, 2004.
2. Bengtsson, H, Ekstrand, J, Walden, M, and Hagglund, M. Muscle
injury rates in professional football increase with fixture congestion:
An 11-year follow-up of the UEFA champions league injury study.
Br J Sports Med 48: 566–567, 2014.
3. Bradley, PS, Di Mascio, M, Peart, D, Olsen, P, and Sheldon, B. High-
intensity activity profiles of elite soccer players at different
performance levels. J Strength Cond Res 24: 2343–2351, 2010.
4. Bradley, PS, Sheldon, W, Wooster, B, Olsen, P, Boanas, P, and
Krustrup, P. High-intensity running in English FA Premier League
soccer matches. J Sports Sci 27: 159–168, 2009.
5. Brink, MS, Visscher, C, Arends, S, Zwerver, J, Post, WJ, and
Lemmink, KA. Monitoring stress and recovery: New insights for the
prevention of injuries and illnesses in elite youth soccer players. Br J
Sports Med 44: 809–815, 2010.
6. Casamichana, D, Castellano, J, Calleja-Gonzalez, J, San Roman, J,
and Castagna, C. Relationship between indicators of training load in
soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 27: 369–374, 2013.
7. Cohen, J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences.
Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates, 1988.
8. Coutts, AJ and Duffield, R. Validity and reliability of GPS devices for
measuring movement demands of team sports. J Sci Med Sport 13:
133–135, 2010.
9. Dellal, A, Lago-Penas, C, Rey, E, Chamari, K, and Orhant, E. The
effects of a congested fixture period on physical performance,
technical activity and injury rate during matches in a professional
soccer team. Br J Sports Med 49: 390–394, 2013.
10. Di Salvo, V, Gregson, W, Atkinson, G, Tordoff, P, and Drust, B.
Analysis of high intensity activity in premier league soccer. Int J
Sports Med 30: 205–212, 2009.
11. Ekstrand, J, Hagglund, M, and Walden, M. Epidemiology of muscle
injuries in professional football (Soccer). Am J Sports Med 39: 1226–
1232, 2011.
12. Ekstrand, J, Hagglund, M, and Walden, M. Injury incidence and
injury patterns in professional football: The UEFA injury study. Br J
Sports Med 45: 553–558, 2011.
13. Foster, C. Monitoring training in athletes with reference to
overtraining syndrome. Med Sci Sports Exerc 30: 1164–1168, 1998.
14. Fuller, CW, Ekstrand, J, Junge, A, Andersen, TE, Bahr, R, Dvorak, J,
Hagglund, M, McCrory, P, and Meeuwisse, WH. Consensus
statement on injury definitions and data collection procedures in
studies of football (soccer) injuries. Br J Sports Med 40: 193–201, 2006.
15. Gabbett, TJ. Influence of training and match intensity on injuries in
rugby league. J Sports Sci 22: 409–417, 2004.
16. Gabbett, TJ and Jenkins, DG. Relationship between training load
and injury in professional rugby league players. J Sci Med Sport 14:
204–209, 2011.
17. Gabbett, TJ, Jenkins, DG, and Abernethy, B. Physical demands of
professional rugby league training and competition using
microtechnology. J Sci Med Sport 15: 80–86, 2012.
18. Gabbett, TJ and Mulvey, MJ. Time-motion analysis of small-sided
training games and competition in elite women soccer players.
J Strength Cond Res 22: 543–552, 2008.
Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com
19. Gabbett, TJ and Ullah, S. Relationship between running loads and
soft-tissue injury in elite team sport athletes. J Strength Cond Res 26:
953–960, 2012.
20. Gomez-Piriz, PT, Jimenez-Reyes, P, and Ruiz-Ruiz, C. Relation
between total body load and session rating of perceived exertion in
professional soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 25: 2100–2103, 2011.
21. Hagglund, M, Walden, M, Magnusson, H, Kristenson, K,
Bengtsson, H, and Ekstrand, J. Injuries affect team performance
negatively in professional football: An 11-year follow-up of the
UEFA champions league injury study. Br J Sports Med 47: 738–742,
2013.
22. Hawkins, RD and Fuller, CW. A prospective epidemiological study
of injuries in four English professional football clubs. Br J Sports Med
33: 196–203, 1999.
23. Hooper, SL and Mackinnon, LT. Monitoring overtraining in
athletes. Recommendations. Sports Med 20: 321–327, 1995.
24. Impellizzeri, FM, Rampinini, E, Coutts, AJ, Sassi, A, and
Marcora, SM. Use of RPE-based training load in soccer. Med Sci
Sports Exerc 36: 1042–1047, 2004.
25. Kellmann, M. Preventing overtraining in athletes in high-intensity
sports and stress/recovery monitoring. Scand J Med Sci Sports 20
(Suppl.2): 95–102, 2010.
26. Kraemer, HC and Thiemann, S. How Many Subjects?: Statistical
Power Analysis in Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications,
1987.
27. Meeusen, R, Duclos, M, Foster, C, Fry, A, Gleeson, M, Nieman, D,
Raglin, J, Rietjens, G, Steinacker, J, and Urhausen, A. Prevention,
diagnosis, and treatment of the overtraining syndrome: Joint
consensus statement of the European College of Sport Science and
the American College of sports Medicine. Med Sci Sports Exerc 45:
186–205, 2013.
28. Mortatti, AL, Moreira, A, Aoki, MS, Crewther, BT, Castagna, C, de
Arruda, AF, and Filho, JM. Effect of competition on salivary cortisol,
immunoglobulin A, and upper respiratory tract infections in elite
young soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 26: 1396–1401, 2012.
29. Nielsen, RO, Cederholm, P, Buist, I, Sorensen, H, Lind, M, and
Rasmussen, S. Can GPS Be used to detect deleterious progression in
training volume among runners? J Strength Cond Res 27: 1471–1478,
2013.
30. Plews, DJ, Laursen, PB, Stanley, J, Kilding, AE, and Buchheit, M.
Training adaptation and heart rate variability in elite endurance
athletes: Opening the door to effective monitoring. Sports Med 43:
773–781, 2013.
31. Rogalski, B, Dawson, B, Heasman, J, and Gabbett, TJ. Training and
game loads and injury risk in elite Australian footballers. J Sci Med
Sport 16: 499–503, 2013.
32. Scott, BR, Lockie, RG, Knight, TJ, Clark, AC, and Janse de
Jonge, XA. A comparison of methods to quantify the in-season
training load of professional soccer players. Int J Sport Physiol
Perform 8: 195–202, 2013.
33. Scott, TJ, Black, CR, Quinn, J, and Coutts, AJ. Validity and reliability
of the session-RPE method for quantifying training in Australian
football: A comparison of the CR10 and CR100 scales. J Strength
Cond Res 27: 270–276, 2013.
34. Varley, MC, Fairweather, IH, and Aughey, RJ. Validity and reliability
of GPS for measuring instantaneous velocity during acceleration,
deceleration, and constant motion. J Sports Sci 30: 121–127, 2012.
35. Varley, MC, Gabbett, T, and Aughey, RJ. Activity profiles of
professional soccer, rugby league and Australian football match play.
J Sports Sci 32: 1858–1866, 2013.
36. Wehbe, GM, Hartwig, TB, and Duncan, CS. Movement analysis of
Australian national league soccer players using global positioning
system technology. J Strength Cond Res 28: 834–842, 2014.
VOLUME 30 | NUMBER 2 | FEBRUARY 2016 | 367