RPE and its relationship with the risk of injury in footballers
Overtime, the competitive distance among elite football teams has shortened, so the focus is currently on those aspects that can tip the scale to one side or the other.
The pre-season or preparatory phase of the season is a time when major “errors” in training load management are often committed. Pre-season is the ideal moment for the coaching staff to instill their philosophy, style and/or model of play in the team. However, is this the philosopher’s stone of the pre-season?
Nowadays, many coaches still choose to ignore scientific knowledge and continue to focus on the importance of preparing their players physically, believing that the primary components of this period are to refuel players or see them suffer in order to later be able to handle the competition period. Classic training principles are also often compromised during this period of the season. We do not give our full attention to the principle of progression, passing rapidly from the lowest training load period of the season (vacation) to one of the periods with the highest training load, which is typically in weeks 3-4 of the pre-season. It is a time when we often also ignore the principle of individualization in favor of the proposed plans.
Group running or physical training circuits, where there is coffee with milk for everyone, are just a couple of the most frequent examples in this period of the season. The density of training sessions and matches (official and unofficial) makes it difficult to comply with the principle of optimal relationship between load and recovery, causing the athlete to accumulate a level of fatigue that could increase the risk of injury. Lastly, and perhaps the principle that is most forgotten in a classic pre-season, is the principle of specificity. Training plans that are far removed from the demands of the game are going to make it more difficult to transfer lessons learned and/or adaptation to football practice.
In terms of injury rates during the pre-season period, the majority of studies have found that there is a significantly higher injury rate during this period (Gabbett, 2004). Taking these statistics into account, it is clear that there is something that we are doing wrong. Temporal structures where the athlete must train with volumes and intensities that are much higher than the annual average (up to three times higher) put the player’s vigor at risk and can even increase the likelihood of sports injury. In addition, these high loads, characterized in many cases as having low specificity content, will actually have a negative impact on the athlete’s physical condition. We could even think of this as reversing the athlete’s adaptation. Therefore, pre-season can become an explosive mixture: a higher probability of injury combined with more time spent training (with little impact or minor physical improvements obtained).
The results obtained by Malone, Owen et al., (2017) seem to indicate that the relationship between accumulated load during the mesocycle (4 week period) and probability of injury is different during the pre-season as compared to the competitive season. Specifically, during the pre-season there seems to be a positive relationship between training load and probability of injury, that is, the higher the training load, the greater the probability of injury.
Practical applications of research conducted on the impact of pre-season seem to indicate that one of the objectives of the pre-season period should be that athletes complete the training sessions. Designing pre-seasons that allow an athlete to physiologically adapt, while minimizing injury risk and maximizing the availability of players for the sessions, should be one of the pre-season objectives (Windt et al., 2017). Thus it would seem that the traditional view of the pre-season as a time to refuel athletes is being gradually replaced by the concept of a period of gradual preparation where the athlete reacquaints himself with the activity, progressively and specifically.
Gabbett T.J. Influence of training and match intensity on injuries in rugby league. J Sports Sci 2004;22:409–17.
Owen, A.L., Forsyth, J.J., Wong, D.P., Dellal, A., Connelly, S., & Chamari, K. (2015). Heart rate based training intensity and its impact on injury incidence amongst elite level professional soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 29(6):1705-12.
Windt, J., Gabbett, T.J., Ferris, D., Khan, K.M. (2017). Training load–injury paradox: is greater preseason participation associated with lower in-season injury risk in elite rugby league players? Br J Sports Med, 51(8):645-650.
Mental abilities, although not yet fully appreciated, are already considered a relevant part of performance. But their importance could go beyond that: Do they also influence the injury risk, including recurrence, once the player returns to play?
Although several studies have tried to evaluate the characteristics of the risk of injury in handball players, they have been unable to reach sufficiently reliable conclusions. A new study of all the FC Barcelona handball categories has attempted to shed more light on the subject.
Although there are several studies on this topic, many of them have analyzed these demands by looking at just a few variables or using very broad timeframes. A new study completed by physical trainers from F.C. Barcelona has analyzed several of these details more closely.
An article published in The Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine —in which members of the club’s medical services participated— now suggests to consider the detailed structure of the area affected, and treating the extracellular matrix as an essential player in the prognosis of the injury.
In this article, Tim Gabbett and his team provide a user-friendly guide for practitioners when describing the general purpose of load management to coaches.
For the first time, it has been demonstrated that it does not take months of training to significantly improve both muscle volume and strength; instead, two weeks of an appropriate exercise are enough.
Training using eccentric exercises is important to prevent possible damage. However, intensive training can also cause muscle damage, so it is critical to be vigilant in order to keep injury risk to an absolute minimum.
Cardiovascular endurance manifests as a moderator of the load result to which the athlete is exposed.
Through the use of computer vision we can identify some shortcomings in the body orientation of players in different game situations.