Do players with superior physiological attributes outwork their less-conditioned counterparts? A study in Gaelic football

Abstract

This study investigated the association of physiological attributes with in-game workload measures during competitive Gaelic football match-play. Fifty-two male developmental level Gaelic football players (mean ± SD; age: 22.9 ± 3.8 years) underwent measurements of anthropometric characteristics, running speed, muscular strength and power, blood lactate (BLa), running economy and aerobic capacity during two separate testing visits. Global Positioning System units (18-Hz) were used to record players in-game workloads during a competitive match 1-week following the baseline physiological assessments. Results indicated that players body fat percentage, drop jump height (DJ) and running velocity at 4 mmol · L^-1 BLa were significantly associated with the number of high-speed runs completed (Adjusted R² 26.8% to 39.5%; p < 0.05) while 20 m running speed, running velocity at 2 mmol · L^-1 BLa and DJ were significantly associated with the number of accelerations completed (Adjusted R² 17.2% to 22.0%; p < 0.05) during match-play. Additionally, aerobic capacity and body fat percentage were significantly associated with total distance (Adjusted R² 14.4% to 22.4%; p < 0.05) while body fat percentage, DJ and 20 m running speed were significantly associated with high-speed distance (Adjusted R² 17.8% to 22.0%; p < 0.05). Players were also divided into higher-standard and lower-standard groups using a median split of these physiological attributes. Players in the higher-standard groups completed significantly more high-speed runs and accelerations and covered significantly larger total and high-speed distances (+10.4% to +36.8%; ES = 0.67 to 0.88; p < 0.05) when compared to the lower-standard groups. This study demonstrates that superior levels of physical conditioning are associated with larger in-game workloads during Gaelic football match-play.

Keywords: Aerobic capacity; External loads; GPS; Neuromuscular; Physical fitness; Team Sport.

FIG. 1

Schematic overview of study methodology.

FIG. 2

Plot of actual (ACT) vs. predicted (PRE) values for the number of (A) 1^st half high-speed runs (HSR), (B) 2^nd half HSR, (C) full match HSR, (D) 1^st half accelerations, (E) 2^nd half accelerations and (F) full match accelerations completed during match-play. Dependant variables for total HSR (n) (≥ 5.5 m · s⁻¹): body fat (%), drop jump and running velocity at 4 mmol · L⁻¹. Dependant variables for total accelerations (n) (≥ 3 m · s ⁻²): running speed (20 m), running velocity at 2 mmol · L⁻¹ and DJ). Shading represents 95% confidence intervals.

FIG. 3

Plot of actual (ACT) vs. predicted (PRE) values for (A) 1^st half distance, (B) 2^nd half distance, (C) full match distance, (D) 1^st half high-speed distance (HSD), (E) 2^nd half HSD and (F) full match HSD covered during match-play. Total distance (m) dependant variables: ${\dot{\text{V}}\text{O}}_{2\max }$ and body fat (%). HSD (≥ 5.5 m · s ⁻¹) (m) dependent variables: body fat (%), drop jump and 20 m running speed. Shading represents 95% confidence intervals.

FIG. 4

Differences in the number of accelerations (A) and high-speed runs (HSR) (B) completed during match-play between higherstandard (HS) and lower-standard (LS) component of fitness groups. † Denotes a significant difference between HS and HS groups.

FIG. 5

Differences in total distance covered (A) and high-speed distance (HSD) covered (B) during match-play between higherstandard (HS) and lower-standard (LS) component of fitness groups. † Denotes a significant difference between HS and HS groups.