Introduction Synthetic pitches are greatly increasing in popularity, but little is known on how playing on artificial turf rather than natural grass influences the physical performance in soccer. The aim of this study is to compare the two surfaces about the outcomes of a repeated sprint ability (RSA) test, shown as a valid indicator of match-related physical performance in soccer players2. We hypothesize that players that usually train on synthetic turf would perform better on that surface compared to natural grass. Methods Eighteen young male soccer players from two teams were recruited. Team A (n=11; 16.6  0.3 ys; 71.9  7.4 Kg; 178.5  4.8 cm) usually trains on a synthetic pitch, while Team B (n=7; 18.7  0.7 ys; 71.7  6.7 Kg; 178.3  5.7 cm) usually trains on natural grass. All the players performed two identical RSA tests, respectively on synthetic (Synt) turf (Football Green 57 SL, Limonta Sport, Italy) and natural grass (Nat). The protocol consisted of 6x40 m shuttle run sprints at maximal speed with 20 s of passive recovery1. In each sprint, the players started from a line, reached another line 20 m apart, touched it with a foot, and came back. Best time of a single trial (TBEST), mean time of the 6 sprints (TMEAN) and percent decrement (Decr%) = ([TMEAN/TBEST]x100)–100)) were assessed. Paired Wilcoxon tests were used to compare mean values between Nat and Synt. Significance was set at p<0.01. Results The team that generally trains on synthetic turf showed significantly lower TBEST and TMEAN on Synt compared to Nat, while Decr% was unchanged. No significant differences were found for the players usually training on natural grass. Discussion – Conclusions The results supported our hypothesis that those players who are familiar with artificial turf perform better in the considered RSA test on synthetic than on natural grass. The lower TBEST and TMEAN observed in players of Team A on the artificial surface may be due to their ability to reduce the braking time before the inversion of direction by exploiting the higher adherence of the synthetic turf. Therefore, training habitually on artificial turf may advantageously influence the physical performance in soccer matches taking place on synthetic fields.
Di Michele R., Di Renzo M., Ammazzalorso S., Merni F. (2008). Repeated sprint ability on synthetic turf vs. natural grass in young soccer players.
Repeated sprint ability on synthetic turf vs. natural grass in young soccer players
DI MICHELE, ROCCO;MERNI, FRANCO
2008
Abstract
Introduction Synthetic pitches are greatly increasing in popularity, but little is known on how playing on artificial turf rather than natural grass influences the physical performance in soccer. The aim of this study is to compare the two surfaces about the outcomes of a repeated sprint ability (RSA) test, shown as a valid indicator of match-related physical performance in soccer players2. We hypothesize that players that usually train on synthetic turf would perform better on that surface compared to natural grass. Methods Eighteen young male soccer players from two teams were recruited. Team A (n=11; 16.6 0.3 ys; 71.9 7.4 Kg; 178.5 4.8 cm) usually trains on a synthetic pitch, while Team B (n=7; 18.7 0.7 ys; 71.7 6.7 Kg; 178.3 5.7 cm) usually trains on natural grass. All the players performed two identical RSA tests, respectively on synthetic (Synt) turf (Football Green 57 SL, Limonta Sport, Italy) and natural grass (Nat). The protocol consisted of 6x40 m shuttle run sprints at maximal speed with 20 s of passive recovery1. In each sprint, the players started from a line, reached another line 20 m apart, touched it with a foot, and came back. Best time of a single trial (TBEST), mean time of the 6 sprints (TMEAN) and percent decrement (Decr%) = ([TMEAN/TBEST]x100)–100)) were assessed. Paired Wilcoxon tests were used to compare mean values between Nat and Synt. Significance was set at p<0.01. Results The team that generally trains on synthetic turf showed significantly lower TBEST and TMEAN on Synt compared to Nat, while Decr% was unchanged. No significant differences were found for the players usually training on natural grass. Discussion – Conclusions The results supported our hypothesis that those players who are familiar with artificial turf perform better in the considered RSA test on synthetic than on natural grass. The lower TBEST and TMEAN observed in players of Team A on the artificial surface may be due to their ability to reduce the braking time before the inversion of direction by exploiting the higher adherence of the synthetic turf. Therefore, training habitually on artificial turf may advantageously influence the physical performance in soccer matches taking place on synthetic fields.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
