Training load and fitness monitoring in Czech football: coach practices and perspectives.

IF 2.6 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES Frontiers in Sports and Active Living Pub Date : 2025-01-31 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fspor.2025.1513573
Dominik Bokůvka, Michal Hrubý, Kristýna Čuperková, Tomáš Vencúrik, Vitor Padinha, Ana Carolina Paludo
{"title":"Training load and fitness monitoring in Czech football: coach practices and perspectives.","authors":"Dominik Bokůvka, Michal Hrubý, Kristýna Čuperková, Tomáš Vencúrik, Vitor Padinha, Ana Carolina Paludo","doi":"10.3389/fspor.2025.1513573","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The study aimed to describe the practices and perspectives of Czech football coaches regarding the monitoring of players' training load and physical performance, with a focus on identifying key barriers and preferred sources of information.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 235 football coaches completed an online survey comprehending training load monitoring methods, physical performance assessments, barriers to implementation, and information sources.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among respondents, 93.7% reported monitoring training load, with training diaries (70%) being the most utilized method for external load measures and heart rate (45%) for internal load. Despite this, 42.7% of coaches did not monitor internal load and 21.7% did not conduct physical fitness evaluations. The most frequently reported barrier was a lack of resources (74.5%), though elite-level coaches (52.8%) and strength and conditioning coaches (75%) identified human resources as their primary limitation. Across all levels, the Football Association was the preferred source of information (61.7%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings highlight the predominance of traditional monitoring practices among the Czech football coaches, alongside with notable gaps in internal load tracking and fitness evaluation. The resource constraints remain a major barrier. Practical recommendations include promoting economical monitoring tools, such as RPE, and enhancing collaboration among stakeholders to improved monitoring strategies. The Football Association's play a key role on support these efforts.</p>","PeriodicalId":12716,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living","volume":"7 ","pages":"1513573"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11825800/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Sports and Active Living","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2025.1513573","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The study aimed to describe the practices and perspectives of Czech football coaches regarding the monitoring of players' training load and physical performance, with a focus on identifying key barriers and preferred sources of information.

Methods: A total of 235 football coaches completed an online survey comprehending training load monitoring methods, physical performance assessments, barriers to implementation, and information sources.

Results: Among respondents, 93.7% reported monitoring training load, with training diaries (70%) being the most utilized method for external load measures and heart rate (45%) for internal load. Despite this, 42.7% of coaches did not monitor internal load and 21.7% did not conduct physical fitness evaluations. The most frequently reported barrier was a lack of resources (74.5%), though elite-level coaches (52.8%) and strength and conditioning coaches (75%) identified human resources as their primary limitation. Across all levels, the Football Association was the preferred source of information (61.7%).

Conclusion: The findings highlight the predominance of traditional monitoring practices among the Czech football coaches, alongside with notable gaps in internal load tracking and fitness evaluation. The resource constraints remain a major barrier. Practical recommendations include promoting economical monitoring tools, such as RPE, and enhancing collaboration among stakeholders to improved monitoring strategies. The Football Association's play a key role on support these efforts.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
捷克足球的训练负荷和体能监测:教练的做法和观点。
前言:本研究旨在描述捷克足球教练在监测球员训练负荷和身体表现方面的做法和观点,重点是确定关键障碍和首选信息来源。方法:共有235名足球教练完成了一项在线调查,了解训练负荷监测方法、身体表现评估、实施障碍和信息来源。结果:在受访者中,93.7%的人报告监测训练负荷,训练日记(70%)是最常用的外负荷测量方法,心率(45%)是内负荷测量方法。尽管如此,42.7%的教练没有监测内部负荷,21.7%的教练没有进行体能评估。最常见的障碍是缺乏资源(74.5%),尽管精英级教练(52.8%)和力量和体能教练(75%)认为人力资源是他们的主要限制。在所有级别中,足协是首选的信息来源(61.7%)。结论:研究结果突出了传统的监测方法在捷克足球教练中占主导地位,同时在内部负荷跟踪和健康评估方面存在显著差距。资源限制仍然是一个主要障碍。切实可行的建议包括推广经济监测工具,如RPE,以及加强利益攸关方之间的协作,以改进监测战略。英足总在支持这些努力方面发挥了关键作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
7.40%
发文量
459
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊最新文献
When feelings matter: moderating role of affective attitude on cognitive attitude and adolescents' out-of-school physical activity. Editorial: Optimizing performance and injury prevention in combat sports and martial arts: methodologies for control and monitoring. Enhancing reactive strength index through braking-phase focused verbal instruction. Comparison of the methods for detecting lower limb asymmetries: isokinetic dynamometry vs. tensiomyography derived indices. Mediating effects of physical activity enjoyment on physical activity levels in adults with cystic fibrosis.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1