设定基准 "第 2 部分:国际足联 2022 年卡塔尔世界杯参赛队的体能要求。

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 SPORT SCIENCES
Biology of Sport Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-09-07 DOI:10.5114/biolsport.2024.131091
Paul S Bradley
{"title":"设定基准 \"第 2 部分:国际足联 2022 年卡塔尔世界杯参赛队的体能要求。","authors":"Paul S Bradley","doi":"10.5114/biolsport.2024.131091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to contextualise and benchmark the physical demands of teams in the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022. With FIFA's official approval, all sixty-four games were analysed during the competition (<i>n</i> = 32 teams) using a multi-camera computerised tracking system. On average, teams during Qatar 2022 covered around 108.1 ± 3.6 km in total, with 9.0 ± 0.9 and 2.3 ± 0.3 km covered at the higher intensities (≥20.0 and ≥25.0 km · h<sup>-1</sup>), respectively. Compared to the FIFA World Cup Russia 2018, national teams in Qatar 2022 covered only 3% more total distance but 16-19% more distance at the higher intensities (<i>P</i> < 0.01; Effect Size [ES]: 0.9-2.0). When the data was adjusted based on the number of minutes played, tournament differences at the higher intensities were less pronounced (9-12%; <i>P</i> < 0.01; ES: 0.7-1.3). The United States, Canada, Saudi Arabia, Germany and IR Iran covered 19-34% more high-intensity distance than Argentina, Ecuador, Qatar, Poland and Costa Rica during the 2022 tournament (<i>P</i> < 0.01; ES: 3.2-3.5). Match-to-match variation of each team in Qatar 2022 revealed Ecuador and Uruguay were particularly consistent for the distances covered at higher intensities (Coefficient of Variation [CV]: 2-3%), whilst Japan demonstrated considerable variation (CV: 23-29%). Teams generally covered more total distance on a per-minute basis in the first versus the second half (<i>P</i> < 0.01; ES: 1.2), but no differences existed at higher intensities (<i>P</i> > 0.05; ES: 0.0-0.1). Correlations between the number of high-intensity runs and various phase of play events across all teams were strongest for defensive transitions and recoveries, in addition to progressions up the pitch and into the final third (<i>r</i> = 0.63-0.75; <i>P</i> < 0.01). The present findings provide valuable context into the contemporary team demands of international football. This information could be useful for practitioners to benchmark team performances and to potentially understand the myriad of factors impacting physical performances.</p>","PeriodicalId":55365,"journal":{"name":"Biology of Sport","volume":"1 1","pages":"271-278"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10765426/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"'Setting the Benchmark' Part 2: Contextualising the Physical Demands of Teams in the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022.\",\"authors\":\"Paul S Bradley\",\"doi\":\"10.5114/biolsport.2024.131091\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study aimed to contextualise and benchmark the physical demands of teams in the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022. With FIFA's official approval, all sixty-four games were analysed during the competition (<i>n</i> = 32 teams) using a multi-camera computerised tracking system. On average, teams during Qatar 2022 covered around 108.1 ± 3.6 km in total, with 9.0 ± 0.9 and 2.3 ± 0.3 km covered at the higher intensities (≥20.0 and ≥25.0 km · h<sup>-1</sup>), respectively. Compared to the FIFA World Cup Russia 2018, national teams in Qatar 2022 covered only 3% more total distance but 16-19% more distance at the higher intensities (<i>P</i> < 0.01; Effect Size [ES]: 0.9-2.0). When the data was adjusted based on the number of minutes played, tournament differences at the higher intensities were less pronounced (9-12%; <i>P</i> < 0.01; ES: 0.7-1.3). The United States, Canada, Saudi Arabia, Germany and IR Iran covered 19-34% more high-intensity distance than Argentina, Ecuador, Qatar, Poland and Costa Rica during the 2022 tournament (<i>P</i> < 0.01; ES: 3.2-3.5). Match-to-match variation of each team in Qatar 2022 revealed Ecuador and Uruguay were particularly consistent for the distances covered at higher intensities (Coefficient of Variation [CV]: 2-3%), whilst Japan demonstrated considerable variation (CV: 23-29%). Teams generally covered more total distance on a per-minute basis in the first versus the second half (<i>P</i> < 0.01; ES: 1.2), but no differences existed at higher intensities (<i>P</i> > 0.05; ES: 0.0-0.1). Correlations between the number of high-intensity runs and various phase of play events across all teams were strongest for defensive transitions and recoveries, in addition to progressions up the pitch and into the final third (<i>r</i> = 0.63-0.75; <i>P</i> < 0.01). The present findings provide valuable context into the contemporary team demands of international football. This information could be useful for practitioners to benchmark team performances and to potentially understand the myriad of factors impacting physical performances.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55365,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biology of Sport\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"271-278\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10765426/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biology of Sport\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2024.131091\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biology of Sport","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/biolsport.2024.131091","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在了解国际足联 2022 年卡塔尔世界杯对参赛球队体能要求的背景和基准。经国际足联官方批准,使用多摄像头计算机跟踪系统分析了比赛期间的所有六十四场比赛(n = 32 支球队)。平均而言,2022 年卡塔尔世界杯期间各队的总行程约为 108.1 ± 3.6 公里,在较高强度下(≥20.0 和 ≥25.0 公里-小时-1)分别为 9.0 ± 0.9 和 2.3 ± 0.3 公里。与 2018 年俄罗斯世界杯相比,2022 年卡塔尔世界杯国家队的总覆盖距离仅增加了 3%,但在较高强度下的覆盖距离增加了 16-19%(P < 0.01;效应大小 [ES]:0.9-2.0)。如果根据比赛分钟数调整数据,在较高强度下的比赛差异就不那么明显了(9-12%;P < 0.01;ES:0.7-1.3)。与阿根廷、厄瓜多尔、卡塔尔、波兰和哥斯达黎加相比,美国、加拿大、沙特阿拉伯、德国和伊朗(IR Iran)在 2022 年比赛期间的高强度距离多出 19-34%(P < 0.01;ES:3.2-3.5)。2022 年卡塔尔世界杯各队在比赛间的差异显示,厄瓜多尔和乌拉圭在高强度距离上的表现尤为一致(变异系数 [CV]:2-3%),而日本则表现出相当大的差异(CV:23-29%)。上半场与下半场相比,各队每分钟的总距离通常更长(P < 0.01;ES:1.2),但在更高强度下没有差异(P > 0.05;ES:0.0-0.1)。所有球队的高强度跑动次数与各比赛阶段事件之间的相关性在防守转换和回追方面最强,此外,在上半场和进入最后三分之一时也是如此(r = 0.63-0.75; P < 0.01)。本研究结果为了解当代国际足球的团队要求提供了宝贵的背景资料。这些信息有助于从业人员为球队表现制定基准,并有可能了解影响体能表现的众多因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
'Setting the Benchmark' Part 2: Contextualising the Physical Demands of Teams in the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022.

This study aimed to contextualise and benchmark the physical demands of teams in the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022. With FIFA's official approval, all sixty-four games were analysed during the competition (n = 32 teams) using a multi-camera computerised tracking system. On average, teams during Qatar 2022 covered around 108.1 ± 3.6 km in total, with 9.0 ± 0.9 and 2.3 ± 0.3 km covered at the higher intensities (≥20.0 and ≥25.0 km · h-1), respectively. Compared to the FIFA World Cup Russia 2018, national teams in Qatar 2022 covered only 3% more total distance but 16-19% more distance at the higher intensities (P < 0.01; Effect Size [ES]: 0.9-2.0). When the data was adjusted based on the number of minutes played, tournament differences at the higher intensities were less pronounced (9-12%; P < 0.01; ES: 0.7-1.3). The United States, Canada, Saudi Arabia, Germany and IR Iran covered 19-34% more high-intensity distance than Argentina, Ecuador, Qatar, Poland and Costa Rica during the 2022 tournament (P < 0.01; ES: 3.2-3.5). Match-to-match variation of each team in Qatar 2022 revealed Ecuador and Uruguay were particularly consistent for the distances covered at higher intensities (Coefficient of Variation [CV]: 2-3%), whilst Japan demonstrated considerable variation (CV: 23-29%). Teams generally covered more total distance on a per-minute basis in the first versus the second half (P < 0.01; ES: 1.2), but no differences existed at higher intensities (P > 0.05; ES: 0.0-0.1). Correlations between the number of high-intensity runs and various phase of play events across all teams were strongest for defensive transitions and recoveries, in addition to progressions up the pitch and into the final third (r = 0.63-0.75; P < 0.01). The present findings provide valuable context into the contemporary team demands of international football. This information could be useful for practitioners to benchmark team performances and to potentially understand the myriad of factors impacting physical performances.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Biology of Sport
Biology of Sport 生物-运动科学
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
12.50%
发文量
113
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Biology of Sport is the official journal of the Institute of Sport in Warsaw, Poland, published since 1984. Biology of Sport is an international scientific peer-reviewed journal, published quarterly in both paper and electronic format. The journal publishes articles concerning basic and applied sciences in sport: sports and exercise physiology, sports immunology and medicine, sports genetics, training and testing, pharmacology, as well as in other biological aspects related to sport. Priority is given to inter-disciplinary papers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信