See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233774659

Match Performance Comparison in Top English

Soccer Leagues

Article in International Journal of Sports Medicine · November 2012

DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1327660 · Source: PubMed

CITATIONS READS

29 797

5 authors, including:

Valter Di Salvo Carlos Gonzalez-Haro

Italian University of Sport and Movement "Fo… 50 PUBLICATIONS 250 CITATIONS
45 PUBLICATIONS 1,771 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE

SEE PROFILE

John K De Witt
Wyle
23 PUBLICATIONS 152 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Some different things View project

All content following this page was uploaded by John K De Witt on 29 July 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
526 Training & Testing

Match Performance Comparison in Top English Soccer

Leagues

Authors V. Di Salvo1,2, F. Pigozzi1, C. González-Haro3, M. S. Laughlin4, J. K. De Witt4

1
Affiliations Department of Health Sciences, University of Rome, Rome, Italy
2
Aspire Academy/Qatar Football Association, Doha, Qatar
3
Farmacology and Physiology, University of Zaragoza, Zaragoza, Spain
4
Health and Human Performance, University of Houston, Houston, United States

Key words Abstract Players in the Championship league covered a

●
▶ soccer
▼ total match distance of 11.1 ± 0.9 km compared
●

Downloaded by: University of Houston. Copyrighted material.

▶ leagues comparison
The purpose of this study was to compare with 10.8 ± 1.0 km for players from the Premier-
●
▶ player position
motions of soccer players in the English Premier ship (p < 0.001). Championship players also cov-
●
▶ match analysis
(1st) and Championship (2nd) League. A total of ered greater distances during jogging, running,
●
▶ physical performance

●
▶ specific training 26 449 observations were obtained from players
during 4 seasons (2006–2010) in the 2 leagues.
Time-motions of all players (attackers, central
defenders, central midfielders, wide defenders,
wide midfielders) were recorded during each
match using the Prozone® System, (Leeds, UK),
and categorized by speed intensity. Number of
actions, total distance and the mean distance
covered at each speed intensity were measured.
high-speed running, and sprinting. Premiership
players covered more distance walking. Players
in the Soccer League Championship had more
instances of each condition. Although these dif-
ferences were statistically significant, they were
negligible in practical terms, suggesting match-
related activities do not explain the general
superiority of Premiership players over Champi-
onship players in England.

Introduction the leagues dependent upon their performance

accepted after revision
September 07, 2012
Bibliography
DOI http://dx.doi.org/
10.1055/s-0032-1327660
Published online:
November 26, 2012
Int J Sports Med 2013; 34:
526–532 © Georg Thieme
Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York
ISSN 0172-4622
Correspondence
Prof. Valter Di Salvo
Department of Health Sciences
University of Rome
“Foro Italico”
Piazza Lauro de Bosis 6
00135 Rome
Italy
Tel.: + 39/63/6733 246
Fax: + 39/63/6733 246
Valterdisalvo@hotmail.com
▼ during a season, and while interleague play may
Soccer field player match play characteristics
include the covering of distance at a variety of
speed intensities [4, 10, 12, 16, 30]. During a
match, soccer players must cover distance by
walking, jogging, running, and sprinting, and the
speed intensity is dependent upon a variety of
factors, including training level, team playing
style and ability to maintain possession, player
positions, tactical situations, and period of com-
petition [4, 12, 20, 22, 26, 29].
Time-motion analysis allows the actions of
individual players to be recorded during match
conditions, and provides insight to coaches,
physiologists, and sport scientists regarding the
specific demands of the match [7]. For that rea-
son, researchers have used time-motion analysis
to characterize match actions of players. Video
analysis allows for individual players to be
tracked, and because distance and time are
known, the velocity profiles can be constructed
for an entire match [12, 18, 20, 22, 26, 28].
The Premier League is the top English level and
the Soccer League Championship is the second
highest level in the English Soccer League system.
Teams can be relegated and promoted between
occur in friendlies or Carling Cup and FA Cup
competition, in general, teams play within their
own league throughout the season. Because the
relative levels of the leagues differ, it is possible
that the physiological demands for players within
each league may also differ. Regarding the per-
formance differences between league levels,
there has been little research conducted, with
authors finding that players competing at the
highest standard perform more high-intensity
running during a match than players of a less
elite standard [1, 22]. However, others have not
found differences in sprint times on repeated
sprint ability tests between professional and
semi-professional players [2]. In addition, as soc-
cer conditioning and training programs improve
[14], there may be differences from year to year
within leagues in physiological performances.
Nevertheless, there are no studies that compare
the distance covered and speed intensities
between English Premier League and English
Soccer League Championship.
Thus, the purposes of this study were: 1) to
compare the physical performances between
English Premier League and English Soccer

Di Salvo V et al. Match Performance Comparison in … Int J Sports Med 2013; 34: 526–532

League Championship; 2) to analyze differences within position
between both leagues over a 4-season period; and 3) to deter-
mine if within positional differences exist in the Soccer League
Championship similar to that found in Premier League.
Methods
▼ Normal distribution of data was controlled by P-P plots. Data
Players and match data
Physical performance data were collected using 26 449 observa-
tions throughout 4 seasons, spanning from 2006–07 to 2009–10
from Premier League (PL) (n = 13 991) and Championship League
(CL) (n = 12 458). 1 241 PL and 1 494 CL individual players were
analyzed. Although data were also collected from goalkeepers,
they were excluded from this analysis. In addition, only data for
those players completing entire matches (i. e., 90 min) were
included in the analysis. Players were observed over multiple
matches and the amount of matches per player ranged from 1 to
80 matches for CL (median = 4 matches) and 1–89 matches for PL
(median = 5 matches). The data used for this study were made
available by Prozone Sports Ltd.® (Leeds, UK), who provided all
information necessary for statistical analysis, while maintaining
the anonymity of the players and teams and followed the Euro-
pean Data Protection Law [17]. Written informed consent was
obtained from participating teams, taking these standards into
account. Moreover the present study was carried out in accord-
ance with the ethical standards of the IJSM [19].
Data collection and analyses
Motion analysis data were collected using a computerized, semi-
automated, multi-camera image recognition system, provided
by Prozone® (Prozone Sports Ltd., Leeds, UK). The cameras used
for game capture were either analogue (Vicon Surveyor 236
cameras dome/SV FT-W23) or digital (Sony SNC-RZ25P or Sony
SNC-RX550) and were positioned at roof level of each stadium.
This camera set-up (involving 8 cameras positioned at all 4 cor-
ners of each stadia) has been independently validated to verify
the capture process and subsequent accuracy of the data [13]
and has been shown to have high intra-observer reliability [11].
The Prozone® system allows for the classification and analysis of
different speed intensities. Players were categorized by position
(attackers, central defenders, central midfielders, wide defend-
ers, and wide midfielders). ●▶ Table 1 illustrates the positional
breakdown for each league including all measures and unique
players.
The total distance covered (TDC) during the match was deter-
mined for each player. The following speed intensities were used
to categorize motion: walking (0.2–7.2 km · h − 1); jogging (7.3–
Table 1 Observations by position and league. Unique players are shown for
each league and position in parentheses.
Leagues
Position CL PL Total
mean ± (NP) mean ± (NP) mean ± (NP)
attackers 1 755 (279) 2 044 (250) 3 799 (529)
central defenders 3 140 (259) 3 475 (196) 6 615 (455)
central midfielders 2 811 (310) 3 151 (273) 5 962 (583)
wide defenders 2 909 (310) 3 255 (242) 6 164 (552)
wide midfielders 1 843 (336) 2 066 (280) 3 909 (616)
total 12 458 (1 494) 13 991 (1 241) 26 449 (2 735)
CL: Championship League; PL: Premiership League; NP: Number of Players
Di Salvo V et al. Match Performance Comparison in … Int J Sports Med 2013; 34: 526–532
Training & Testing 527
14.4 km · h − 1); running (14.5–19.8 km · h − 1); high-speed running
(19.9–25.2 km · h − 1); and sprinting ( > 25.2 km · h − 1). The number
of actions, TDC and the distance covered at each speed intensity
were measured.
Statistical analysis
All data were reported as mean ± SD unless otherwise specified.
were analyzed using a 2-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Sepa-
rate evaluations for number of actions, TDC and distance cov-
ered at each speed intensity were conducted. Position and
league were the main effects in the model, and all data were
used. Significant main effects were followed up using Bonfer-
roni-corrected multiple contrasts for positional comparisons
between leagues and for within CL positional comparisons. If
assumptions of normality were violated, Mann-Whitney U non-
parametric tests were used to determine if differences existed
between leagues within positions. Statistical significance was
set a priori at p < 0.05. In addition to the null hypothesis testing,
effect sizes (Cohen’s d; [8]) were reported and the 95 % confi-
dence interval (CI) was also computed for each position between
Downloaded by: University of Houston. Copyrighted material.
leagues. A negative effect size represents a larger mean for the
CL, while positive effect size reflects a larger mean for the PL.
Absolute effect sizes of 0.20, 0.50, and 0.80 represented small,
medium, and large differences, respectively. All statistical analy-
ses were performed using SPSS version 17.0 for Windows (SPSS
Inc., Chicago, IL).
Results
▼
Statistical analyses with the ANOVA followed by league compar-
isons within positions revealed that in every case, a significant
difference was found (p < 0.05-p < 0.001). Significant differences
were most probably detected for all comparisons because of the
very large subject pool. Therefore, the analysis was concentrated
on the effect size (ES) computations in order to highlight the
variables with moderate to high effects (i. e., ES > 0.5).
Match activity differences between leagues
The TDC covered between leagues for each intensity is summa-
rized in ●▶ Table 2. In general, CL players had greater TDC and
distances for each intensity than their PL counterparts except
while walking. However, ES computations suggest that the abso-
lute differences were small, indicating that while differences
between leagues were statistically significant, in practical terms
the 2 leagues had very similar distance profiles.
●
▶ Table 3 shows that CL players covered more total distance
than the PL players at each position. In general, the range of TDC
was between 9 900 m to 11 780 m per match. Central midfielders
and wide midfielders covered the greatest total distance, fol-
lowed by wide defenders, attackers, and central defenders,
regardless of league. Absolute mean differences were between
270 m and 440 m per match. Central defenders and wide defend-
ers ES were –0.71 and –0.62, respectively, indicating moderate
differences between the leagues, while the other positions had
low ES and were thus very similar. Within the CL, central mid-
fielders and wide midfielders had greater TDC, followed by wide
defenders attackers, and central defenders.
528 Training & Testing

CL (mean ± SD) PL (mean ± SD) Effect Size (Cohen’s d) Table 2 TDC, m, showed at dif-
ferent intensities between leagues
(95 % CI) (95 % CI) (95 % CI)
(mean ± SD and 95 % CI) and effect
11 102 ± 916 10 746 ± 964 –0.38 size (Cohen’s d and 95 % CI).
TDC
(11 086, 11 118) (10 730, 10 762) (–0.40, –0.35)
3 709 ± 260 3 794 ± 267 0.32
walking
(3 704, 3 713) (3 789, 3 798) (0.30, 0.25)
4 468 ± 518 4 255 ± 594 –0.38
jogging
(4 459, 4 477) (4 245, 4 264) (–0.41, –0.36)
1 877 ± 413 1 721 ± 412 –0.38
running
(1 870, 1 884) (1 714, 1 728) (–0.40, –0.35)
750 ± 222 693 ± 214 –0.22
high-speed running
(746, 754) (689, 696) (–0.29, –0.24)
273 ± 125 258 ± 122 –0.12
sprinting
(271, 275) (256, 260) (–0.15, –0.10)
TDC: Total Distance Covered; CL: Championship League; PL: Premier League

CL (mean ± SD) PL (mean ± SD) Effect Size (Cohen’s d) Table 3 TDC (m) between
leagues (mean ± SD and 95 % CI)
(95 % CI) (95 % CI) (95 % CI)
and effect size (Cohen’s d and 95 %
10 783 ± 877 10 451 ± 944 − 0.36 CI) by each position. Within the
attackers
(10 742, 10 824) (11 410, 11 492) ( − 0.43, − 0.30) CL, central midfielders and wide

Downloaded by: University of Houston. Copyrighted material.

10 341 ± 611
central defenders
(10 320, 10 363)
11 784 ± 711
central midfielders
(11 757, 11 810)
11 035 ± 663
wide defenders
(11 011, 11 059)
11 766 ± 775
wide midfielders
(11 731, 11 802)
11 102 ± 916
total
(11 086, 11 118)
TDC: Total Distance Covered; CL: Championship League; PL: Premier League
9 901 ± 619 − 0.71 midfielders were not different, but
(9 881, 9 922) ( − 0.76, − 0.67) each were larger than wide de-
11 487 ± 727 − 0.41 fenders, attackers, and central de-
(11 462, 11 513) ( − 0.46, − 0.36) fenders (central midfielders = wide
10 639 ± 609 − 0.62 midfielders > wide defenders > at-
(10 618, 16 973) ( − 0.68, − 0.57) tackers > central defenders).
11 496 ± 821 − 0.34
(11 461, 11 532) ( − 0.40, − 0.27)
10 746 ± 964 − 0.37
(10 730, 10 762) ( − 0.40, − 0.35)

Influence of league upon distance covered within
positions
When broken down by speed intensity (●▶ Table 4), central
defenders and wide defenders displayed the greatest differences
between leagues during jogging and running, showing moderate
ES (d = 0.58–0.75). To be more precise, central defenders and
wide defenders covered more distance, 270 m and 220 m respec-
tively, during jogging in CL than in PL. Moreover, central defend-
ers and wide defenders in CL also covered 180 m and 170 m
more at running intensity than players in PL, respectively. Differ-
ences between the other positions and speed intensities showed
low ES sizes (d = 0.05–0.47). Regardless of league, the distance
covered ranked in order from jogging to walking to running to
high speed running to sprinting.
Within the CL, positional differences existed at each speed inten-
sity. Attackers and central defenders covered the most distance
walking, central midfielders covered the most distance jogging
and running, and wide midfielders covered the most distance
high speed running and sprinting. Positional trends for each
speed intensity were similar for the PL.
Influence of league upon number of actions
Similar to distance covered for each speed intensity, players in
both leagues had the greatest actions for jogging, followed by
walking, running, high-speed running, and sprinting (●▶ Table 5)
Otherwise, attackers in CL performed approximately 50 more
walking actions per match than their PL counterparts (d = 0.52),
while the other positions showed moderate to low ES at the
same speed intensity. For jogging intensity, the differences
between leagues was similar to walking, with all player posi-
tions in CL performed more actions than in PL. The ES was mod-
erate for attackers, central defenders and wide defenders
(d = 0.50–0.58), while central midfielders and wide midfielders
showed low ES (d = 0.41–0.49). For running intensity, all player
positions performed more actions (d = 0.53–071) in CL vs. PL,
with central defenders and wide defenders having the greatest
differences (d = 0.64–0.71). All player positions showed a low ES
for actions performed at high-speed running, except for central
defenders (d = 0.50). For actions performed at sprinting intensity
CL performed a higher number of actions for all positions but
with low ES. Finally, when summed across positions, CL players
averaged higher numbers of actions per match than PL players
(2 701 ± 323 vs. 2 536 ± 343; d = 0.50), indicating a moderate dif-
ference between leagues.
Discussion
▼
Match analysis is a procedure that provides information about
the physical, technical and tactical performance of soccer play-
ers during matches. At the present study it was used, motion
analysis, provides information about player physical perform-
ance by expressing exercise intensity in absolute terms (in
km · h − 1) and classifying the intensity in terms of movement
velocity [11–13]. Although currently the motion analysis
method we used is the most advanced methodology to provide
movement information about professional soccer players during
matches, there are some limitations that are based on the lack of

Di Salvo V et al. Match Performance Comparison in … Int J Sports Med 2013; 34: 526–532
 Table 4 Distance covered, expressed in meters, between leagues (mean ± SD) and effect size (Cohen’s d and 95 % CI) by each position for each speed intensity. Post hoc comparisons were completed with the CL only to deter-
mine with league positional differences.

Attackers Central defenders Central midfielders Wide defenders Wide midfielders Follow-up test
(mean ± SD) (mean ± SD) (mean ± SD) (mean ± SD) (mean ± SD)
(Cohen’s d (95 % CI)) (Cohen’s d (95 % CI)) (Cohen’s d (95 % CI)) (Cohen’s d (95 % CI)) (Cohen’s d (95 % CI))
CL 3 856 ± 266 3 838 ± 202 3 566 ± 231 3 681 ± 219 3 612 ± 265 A = CD > WD > WM > CM
walking PL 3 959 ± 282 3 916 ± 202 3 666 ± 245 3 759 ± 211 3 673 ± 280
effect size 0.38 (0.31, 0.44) 0.39 (0.34, 0.44) 0.42 (0.37, 0.47) 0.36 (0.31, 0.41) 0.22 (0.16, 0.29)
CL 4 151 ± 556 4 231 ± 393 4 890 ± 431 4 394 ± 400 4 645 ± 467 CM > WM > WD > CD > A
jogging PL 3 890 ± 675 3 958 ± 414 4 736 ± 516 4 166 ± 389 4 519 ± 537
effect size − 0.42 ( − 0.48, − 0.35) − 0.68 ( − 0.73, − 0.63) − 0.32 ( − 0.37, − 0.27) − 0.58 ( − 0.63, − 0.53) − 0.25 ( − 0.31, − 0.19)
CL 1 700 ± 359 1 525 ± 245 2 218 ± 349 1 861 ± 286 2 151 ± 346 CM > WM > WD > A > CD
running PL 1 574 ± 355 1 348 ± 231 2 057 ± 332 1 689 ± 248 2 030 ± 382
effect size − 0.35 ( − 0.42, − 0.29) − 0.75 ( − 0.80, − 0.70) − 0.47 ( − 0.52, − 0.42) − 0.65 ( − 0.70, − 0.60) − 0.33 ( − 0.39, − 0.27)
CL 747 ± 186 540 ± 129 829 ± 199 772 ± 169 955 ± 194 WM > CM > WD > A > CD
high-speed running PL 703 ± 168 482 ± 116 765 ± 191 712 ± 156 898 ± 200
effect size − 0.25 ( − 0.31, − 0.19) − 0.47 ( − 0.52, − 0.42) − 0.33 ( − 0.38, − 0.28) − 0.37 ( − 0.42, − 0.32) − 0.29 ( − 0.35, − 0.23)
CL 304 ± 120 180 ± 75 259 ± 105 301 ± 112 382 ± 128 WM > A = WD > CM > CD
sprinting PL 297 ± 115 168 ± 72 241 ± 106 285 ± 113 353 ± 124
effect size − 0.05 ( − 0.12, 0.01) − 0.16 ( − 0.21, − 0.11) − 0.17 ( − 0.22, − 0.12) − 0.14 ( − 0.19, − 0.09) − 0.23 ( − 0.29, − 0.17)
CL: Championship League; PL: Premiership League; A: Attacker; CD: Central defender; CM: Central midfielder; WD: Wide defender; WM: Wide midfielder

Table 5 Number of actions for each speed intensity between leagues (mean ± SD) and effect size (Cohen’s d and 95 % CI) by each position.

Attackers Central defenders Central midfielders Wide defenders Wide midfielders Team Average Position Average
(mean ± SD) (mean ± SD) (mean ± SD) (mean ± SD) (mean ± SD) (mean ± SD)
(Cohen’s d (95 % CI)) (Cohen’s d (95 % CI)) (Cohen’s d (95 % CI)) (Cohen’s d (95 % CI)) (Cohen’s d (95 % CI)) (Cohen’s d (95 % CI))
CL 949 ± 91 984 ± 84 963 ± 80 970 ± 84 945 ± 86 965 ± 86 963 ± 14
walking PL 899 ± 99 948 ± 99 929 ± 93 931 ± 96 914 ± 93 928 ± 97 930 ± 12
Effect Size − 0.52 ( − 0.59, − 0.46) − 0.40 ( − 0.44, − 0.35) − 0.39 ( − 0.44, − 0.34) − 0.42 ( − 0.47, − 0.37) − 0.34 ( − 0.40, − 0.28) − 0.41 ( − 0.43, − 0.38) − 2.24 ( − 3.82, − 0.66)
CL 1 063 ± 141 1 057 ± 125 1 187 ± 123 1 099 ± 123 1 148 ± 129 1 110 ± 137 1 120 ± 49
jogging PL 988 ± 158 982 ± 136 1 124 ± 135 1 027 ± 128 1 094 ± 138 1 042 ± 149 1 053 ± 56
Effect Size − 0.50 ( − 0.57, − 0.44) − 0.58 ( − 0.62, − 0.53) − 0.49 ( − 0.54, − 0.43) − 0.57 ( − 0.62, − 0.52) − 0.41 ( − 0.47, − 0.35) − 0.48 ( − 0.50, − 0.46) − 1.15 ( − 2.48, 0.19)
CL 402 ± 84 362 ± 63 503 ± 83 432 ± 71 492 ± 80 439 ± 93 445 ± 56
running PL 366 ± 82 318 ± 60 459 ± 80 389 ± 64 458 ± 86 394 ± 92 404 ± 49
Effect Size − 0.44 ( − 0.50, − 0.37) − 0.71 ( − 0.76, − 0.66) − 0.53 ( − 0.58, − 0.48) − 0.64 ( − 0.69, − 0.59) − 0.40 ( − 0.47, − 0.34) − 0.48 ( − 0.51, − 0.46) − 0.66 ( − 1.93, 0.62)
CL 148 ± 39 110 ± 28 168 ± 42 153 ± 36 186 ± 41 150 ± 45 153 ± 28
high-speed
PL 136 ± 34 96 ± 25 151 ± 39 138 ± 33 172 ± 41 135 ± 42 138 ± 28
running
Effect Size − 0.32 ( − 0.38, − 0.26) − 0.50 ( − 0.55, − 0.46) − 0.41 ( − 0.46, − 0.35) − 0.44 ( − 0.49, − 0.39) − 0.36 ( − 0.42, − 0.30) − 0.33 ( − 0.35, − 0.30) − 0.48 ( − 1.74, 0.78)
CL 44.0 ± 16 28 ± 11 42 ± 16 44 ± 15 55 ± 17 41 ± 17 42 ± 10
sprinting PL 40.9 ± 14.4 25 ± 10 38 ± 16 40 ± 15 50 ± 17 37 ± 16 38 ± 9
Effect Size − 0.21 ( − 0.27, − 0.15) − 0.31 ( − 0.36, − 0.26) − 0.26 ( − 0.31, − 0.21) − 0.27 ( − 0.32, − 0.22) − 0.30 ( − 0.37, − 0.24) − 0.23 ( − 0.26, − 0.21) − 0.39 ( − 1.64, 0.86)
CL 2 606 ± 321 2 541 ± 280 2v862 ± 297 2 697 ± 291 2 826 ± 311 2 701 ± 323
total number
PL 2 429 ± 385 2 368 ± 300 2 701 ± 316 2 525 ± 298 2 687 ± 333 2 536 ± 343
of actions
Effect Size − 0.50 ( − 0.56, − 0.43) − 0.59 ( − 0.64, − 0.54) − 0.52 ( − 0.57, − 0.47) − 0.58 ( − 0.64, − 0.53) − 0.43 ( − 0.49, − 0.37) − 0.48 ( − 0.51, − 0.46)

Di Salvo V et al. Match Performance Comparison in … Int J Sports Med 2013; 34: 526–532
CL: Championship League; PL: Premiership League
Training & Testing 529

Downloaded by: University of Houston. Copyrighted material.

530 Training & Testing
measurement capacity of some variables that affect the profes-
sional soccer player performance during matches. For example,
motion analysis match analysis systems are not able to account
for the relative physical fitness level of players (movement inten-
sities expressed, for example, in fractional percentage maximal
oxygen consumption uptake ( %VO2max) or fractional percentage
Maximal Aerobic Speed). Furthermore, there are other variables
that match analysis does not measure as well such as team and
individual playing style, tactical organization [27] and seasonal
variations in motion [18]. For that reason, due to the inherent
variability of motion analysis measurements, we used a large
sample size to provide the most precise estimates of the between
match error and to detect real systematic differences in per-
formance characteristics as suggested by Gregson et al. [18].
In spite of finding significant differences between leagues by
position for all distance and instance variables examined, we
feel that the absolute differences in most of the variables are too
small to warrant intense focus. We attribute the significant dif-
ferences to be a result of our extremely large sample sizes, but in
practical terms little to no differences between leagues exist in
our measures. Other authors have used ES computations [8], to
determine the variables with the largest differences during
match analysis studies with professional soccer players [25, 26].
In general, however, we feel there are more similarities than dif-
ferences between leagues, suggesting that player differences in
league level may be more accounted for technical, tactical, and
psychological differences that are not measured with time
motion analysis.
Regardless of league, players covered approximately 10–12 km
during match play. These distances are similar to those reported
in similar research [3, 12, 26]. Throughout all matches in this
study players in CL covered greater distances than in PL for all
positions, which is in agreement with authors that have
observed that top-class soccer players covered less total dis-
tance during matches than moderate professional players [22],
and that more successful teams cover less distance than less
successful teams [24].
The present study shows that central defenders and wide
defenders had the largest differences between leagues. In terms
of total distance, these positions in the CL covered approximately
400 m more than those in similar positions in the PL. This differ-
ence in TDC suggests that the physical requirements for defend-
ers in the CL may be greater than in the PL, and may be a result
of different tactical or playing styles between the leagues as has
been suggested by other authors [5, 29]. It is interesting that
absolute differences between leagues for attackers was less,
being approximately 330 m per game, given that the roles of the
defenders will be somewhat dictated by the attackers’ actions. It
is possible, although not detectable in the data of the present
study, that the differences may be attributed to the defenders’
actions when their team is in possession of the ball. We believe
it is reasonable that when defending, the defenders’ actions will
be highly similar to the attackers’ actions given the defensive
responsibilities of marking and tracking players. Therefore, the
increased differences between leagues for defenders could be
related to their actions when their team is in possession of the
ball, be it playing the ball, supporting, or making penetrating
runs, as has been suggested by some authors [5, 18].
The differences in TDC between leagues between central defend-
ers and wide defenders can be explained mainly by differences
during jogging and running intensities. CL players covered
greater distances during jogging and running of approximately
Di Salvo V et al. Match Performance Comparison in … Int J Sports Med 2013; 34: 526–532
200 m for each intensity. Conversely, PL players walked slightly
more than the CL players. These results agree with Rampinini et
al. [24], and partially agree with those observed by Mohr et al.
[22], who found that players of the less successful teams had a
higher TDC for jogging intensity than players of the highly suc-
cessful teams. In addition, players of the less successful teams
had a higher running intensity distance than the others, and no
difference in walking intensity. As mentioned earlier, it is possi-
ble that CL players joined attacking movements more than in the
PL. However, it is also possible that due to superiority ability,
players in the PL make less technical mistakes. CL players, on the
other hand, must exert more energy to make up for technical
and tactical mistakes. The data of the present study cannot sub-
stantiate this hypothesis, but we feel that it is reasonable to
speculate given the relative levels between the leagues.
Regarding to the frequency of actions for the different speed
intensities, players in the PL performed less number of actions
across speed intensities than players in the CL. Greater changes
in speed could be due to incorrect decision-making. This sug-
gests that while players in each league cover similar distances
throughout a match, PL players will change their velocity less
Downloaded by: University of Houston. Copyrighted material.
than CL players during the match, and possibly suggests that PL
players make decisions quicker and more accurately. This sug-
gestion is in agreement with those found by Vaeyens et al. [33],
who observed that successful players made faster decisions with
a better accuracy response than less successful soccer players;
and in agreement with Diaz del Campo et al. [15] who suggested
that young expert soccer players make decisions faster with
respect to novice players.
When number of actions was examined across speed intensities
within positions, CL attackers performed greater actions at
walking and jogging intensities. CL central defenders, central
midfielders, and wide defenders performed higher number
actions at jogging and running intensities, and during high
speed running, central defenders performed greater number of
actions. Mean differences were on the order of approximately 52
more changes in speed per position in the CL for those positions
with moderate or large effect sizes. Wide midfield differences
were small between leagues. On the other hand, the similarity in
wide midfield movements may suggest that tactical differences
between leagues is less, or may be reflective of a simplified
movement requirement of wide midfielders who typically
restrict their movements to the sides of the pitch.
Energy expenditure during changes of directions and velocity
are larger than during constant velocity movements because of
the need to apply greater force to change velocity [9, 23]. PL play-
ers may be superior to their CL counterparts in decreasing the
need to change velocity by making more accurate initial deci-
sions, thereby increasing overall efficiency. Di Prampero et al. [9]
and Osgnach et al. [23] have proposed a specific methodology to
estimate accelerations in soccer players. Future investigations
should explore how acceleration and velocity interact for players
during matches to potentially quantify physical fitness attributes.
A secondary aim of this investigation was to examine positional
characteristics within the CL to determine if trends exist that are
similar to those found in the PL [11]. Positional differences in
high intensity running and sprinting have been demonstrated in
the PL, where wide midfielders had the most TDC and central
defenders the least at these 2 speeds. The present study found
similar results within the CL, and also found that central mid-
fielders cover the most distance jogging and running and attack-
ers and central defenders cover the most TDC while walking.

The results specific to the CL emphasize that while the absolute
TDC differs between positions, more importantly, the manner in
which distance is covered also differs. Volume and intensity dif-
ferences exist between positions, suggesting that positional-
specific training programs may be most efficient in preparing
players for the demands of match play.
While the present study is the first to report such a large sample
we do want to acknowledge that this data and analysis are sub-
ject to some limitations. It is possible that motions when attack-
ing will differ from those when defending. During a match,
teams will not necessarily spend equal time attacking and
defending [6, 7, 21, 31, 32], which could bias the results. However
because the sample of the present study is so large, we believe
that these potential biases will balance out across the sample.
We also wish to acknowledge that the motion analysis data do
not reflect the reasons why each speed intensity was performed.
It is possible that for some players, an increase in distance cov-
ered or number of actions of a speed intensity is due to superior
decision making and using speed and change of pace to create
more successful attacks. However, the increase could also be a
result of poor decision making that requires players to correct
mistakes, as it was suggested by Rampinini et al. [24]. We have
made some speculation as to why these differences may occur,
but without additional measures we cannot say for certain if
increased motion is a positive or negative occurrence.
An additional limitation is that the data of the present study do
not allow for an analysis of directional changes during a match.
It is reasonable to speculate that an enhanced ability to change
direction coupled with changes in velocity will be more success-
ful during a match than maintenance of direction. If change of
direction data were available, greater insights could be made
about how the players use the changes in velocity throughout a
match, and have large training implications. It has been sug-
gested that the most successful teams spend more time at high-
intensity speeds with possession of the ball, and less time
without possession with respect to less successful teams [24].
Finally, because of the size of our sample, parametric statistical
tests of differences between means revealed significant differ-
ences between leagues for every variable examined. Parametric
statistical tests are powerful for determining if a difference
exists, but will only indicate if 2 groups are different, and not
how different the groups may be. The use of effect size allowed
us to narrow our analysis to those variables that showed moder-
ate or large differences (Cohen’s d; [8]). However, like paramet-
ric tests, effect size tests rely upon group means, standard
deviations, and sample sizes. The determination of a mean dif-
ference that is significant to the field is an objective decision that
must be made by the reader. There may be some differences in
our data that we did not discuss that readers will feel relevant to
performance. We encourage readers to examine the data from
this study to determine if there may be significant applications
to their field of interest.
In conclusion, this study has performed a systematic compari-
son of players from various positions between the English PL
and CL. The results have shown that players on average will
cover 10–12 km regardless of league level using a combination of
speed intensities. Coaches need to develop training programs
that will address the physiological requirements necessary to
cover such differences during professional matches. Further-
more, player performance in each of these 2 leagues does not
appear to be appreciably different in terms of movement. If any-
Di Salvo V et al. Match Performance Comparison in … Int J Sports Med 2013; 34: 526–532
Training & Testing 531
thing, players in the PL cover slightly lower distances than play-
ers in the CL, which may be potentially related to superior
decision-making, and technical skills and increased efficiency in
the upper league players. Activities that require changes of
direction typically require changes of speed combined with
demand of decision-making could be the best approach to creat-
ing efficient, match-applicable training for soccer players. The
study showed that in general CL players run more than PL play-
ers. This highlights that the most important characteristics to
play in the highest division are based on the quality and not on
the quantity. Even if a good physical performance is demanded,
the crucial aspects to play in the highest division seem to be the
technical, tactical and mental ones.
Acknowledgements
▼
The authors would like to express their gratitude to the
Prozone(R) (Leeds, UK) for the assistance with the data acquisi-
tion.
Downloaded by: University of Houston. Copyrighted material.
References
1 Andersson H, Krustrup P, Mohr M. Differences in movement pattern,
heart rate and fatigue development in international versus national
league matches of Swedish and Danish elite female soccer players.
J Sports Sci Med 2007; 10: S109
2 Aziz AR, Mukherjee S, Chia MY, Teh KC. Validity of the running repeated
sprint ability test among playing positions and level of competitive-
ness in trained soccer players. Int J Sports Med 2008; 29: 833–838
3 Bangsbo J, Michalsik L. Assessment and physiological capacity of elite
soccer players. In: Spinks W, Reilly T, Murphy A (eds.). Science and
Football IV. London: Routledge, 2002; 53–62
4 Bangsbo J, Norregaard L, Thorso F. Activity profile of competition soc-
cer. Can J Sports Sci 1991; 16: 110–116
5 Bradley PS, Carling C, Archer D, Roberts J, Dodds A, Di Mascio M, Paul
D, Gomez Diaz A, Peart D, Krustrup P. The effect of playing formation
on high-intensity running and technical profiles in English FA Premier
League soccer matches. J Sports Sci 2011; 9: 821–830
6 Carling C. Analysis of physical activity profiles when running with the
ball in a professional soccer team. J Sports Sci 2010; 28: 319–326
7 Carling C, Bloomfield J, Nelsen L, Reilly T. The role of motion analysis
in elite soccer contemporary performance measurement techniques
and work rate data. Sports Med 2008; 38: 839–862
8 Cohen J (ed.). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences.
2nd ed Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 1988
9 Di Prampero PE, Fusi S, Sepulcri L, Morin JB, Belli A, Antonutto G. Sprint
running: a new energetic approach. J Exp Biol 2005; 208: 2809–2816
10 Di Salvo V, Baron R, González-Haro C, Gormasz C, Pigozzi F, Bachl N.
Sprinting analysis of elite soccer players during European Champions
League and UEFA Cup matches. J Sports Sci 2010; 28: 1489–1494
11 Di Salvo V, Gregson W, Atkinson G, Tordoff P, Drust B. Analysis of high
intensity activity in Premier League soccer. Int J Sports Med 2009;
30: 205–212
12 Di Salvo V, Baron R, Tschan H, Calderon Montero FJ, Bachl N, Pigozzi
F. Performance characteristics according to playing position in elite
soccer. Int J Sports Med 2007; 28: 222–227
13 Di Salvo V, Collins A, McNeill B, Cardinale M. Validation of Prozone®: A
new video-based performance analysis system. Int J Perf Anal Sport
2006; 6: 108–109
14 Di Salvo V, Pigozzi F. Physical training of football players based on their
positional rules in the team. Effects on performance-related factors.
J Sports Med Phys Fitness 1998; 38: 294–297
15 Diaz del Campo DG, Gonzalez Villora S, Garcia Lopez LM, Mitchell S. Dif-
ferences in decision-making development between expert and novice
invasion game players. Percept Mot Skills 2011; 112: 871–888
16 Ekblom B. Applied physiology of soccer. Sports Med 1986; 3: 50–60
17 European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. Directive
95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October
1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing
of personal data and on the free movement of such data. Off J Eur
Comm 1995; 281: 31–50
532 Training & Testing
18 Gregson W, Drust B, Atkinson G, Di Salvo V. Match-to-match variability
of high-speed activities in premier League soccer. Int J Sports Med
2010; 31: 237–242
19 Harriss DJ, Atkinson G. Update – ethical standards in sport and exercise
science research. Int J Sports Med 2011; 32: 819–821
20 Krustrup P, Bangsbo J. Physiological demands of top-class soccer ref-
ereeing in relation to physical capacity: Effect of intense intermittent
exercise training. J Sports Sci 2001; 19: 881–891
21 Lago C. The influence of match location, quality of opposition, and
match status on possession strategies in professional association foot-
ball. J Sports Sci 2009; 27: 1463–1469
22 Mohr M, Krustrup P, Bangsbo J. Match performance of high-stand-
ard soccer players with special reference to development of fatigue.
J Sports Sci 2003; 21: 519–528
23 Osgnach C, Poser S, Bernardini R, Rinaldo R, Di Prampero PE. Energy cost
and metabolic power in elite soccer: a new match analysis approach.
Med Sci Sports Exerc 2010; 42: 170–178
24 Rampinini E, Impellizzeri FM, Castagna C, Coutts AJ, Wisløff U. Techni-
cal performance during soccer matches of the Italian Serie A League:
Effect of fatigue and competitive level. J Sci Med Sport 2009; 12:
227–233
25 Rampinini E, Bishop D, Marcora SM, Ferrari Bravo D, Sassi R, Impel-
lizzeri FM. Validity of simple field tests as indicators of match-related
physical performance in top-level professional soccer players. Int J
Sports Med 2007; 28: 228–235
Di Salvo V et al. Match Performance Comparison in … Int J Sports Med 2013; 34: 526–532
View publication stats
26 Rampinini E, Coutts AJ, Castagna C, Sassi R, Impellizzeri FM. Variation
in top level soccer match performance. Int J Sports Med 2007; 28:
1018–1024
27 Reilly T. Motion analysis and physiological demands. In: Reilly T, Wil-
liams AM (eds.). Science and Soccer. London: Routledge, 2003; 59–73
28 Reilly T, Gilbourne D. Science and football: a review of applied research
in the football codes . J Sports Sci 2003; 21: 693–705
29 Reilly T. Motion analysis and physiological demands. In: Reilly T (ed.).
Science and Soccer. London: E & FN Spon, 1996; 65–83
30 Reilly T. Football. In: Reilly T, Secher N, Snell P, Williams C (ed.). Physi-
ology of Sports. London: E & FN Spon, 1990; 371–426
31 Tenga A, Holme I, Tore Ronglan L, Bahr R. Effect of playing tactics on
achieving score-box possessions in a random series of team posses-
sions from Norwegian professional soccer matches. J Sports Sci 2010;
28: 245–255
32 Tenga A, Holme I, Ronglan LT, Bahr R. Effect of playing tactics on goal
scoring in Norwegian professional soccer. J Sports Sci 2010; 28:
237–244
33 Vaeyens R, Lenoir M, Williams AM, Philippaerts RM. Mechanisms under-
pinning successful decision making in skilled youth soccer players: an
analysis of visual search behaviors. J Mot Behav 2007; 39: 395–408
Downloaded by: University of Houston. Copyrighted material.