Effect of ball inclusion on jump performance in soccer players: a biomechanical approach

IF 2.8 2区 医学 Q1 SPORT SCIENCES Science and Medicine in Football Pub Date : 2021-04-09 DOI:10.1080/24733938.2021.1915495
Alberto Fílter, Jesús Olivares Jabalera, Alejandro Molina-Molina, L. Suárez-Arrones, J. Robles-Rodríguez, Thomas Dos’Santos, I. Loturco, B. Requena, A. Santalla
{"title":"Effect of ball inclusion on jump performance in soccer players: a biomechanical approach","authors":"Alberto Fílter, Jesús Olivares Jabalera, Alejandro Molina-Molina, L. Suárez-Arrones, J. Robles-Rodríguez, Thomas Dos’Santos, I. Loturco, B. Requena, A. Santalla","doi":"10.1080/24733938.2021.1915495","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Objective In soccer, vertical jump means jumping toward a ball. Since no vertical jump test includes the ball as a reference element, the effect that the ball would have in a vertical jump test is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the biomechanical differences between run-up vertical jump measurements without (Run-up Vertical Jump) and with ball inclusion (Heading Test). Methods Twelve semi- and professional soccer players were recruited. Athletes performed both jump tests in a biomechanical laboratory, where kinetic and spatiotemporal variables were collected and compared using a Student’s dependent t-test for paired samples. Results Overall, players performed a different jumping strategy during the heading test compared to the run-up vertical jump, exhibiting: 1) higher horizontal velocity during initial contact (+45.3%, P ≤ .001), 2) shorter contact time, greater rate of force development, and total impulse during push-off (+27.5%, +53%, and +10.6%, respectively, P ≤ .008), 3) higher CoM horizontal and resultant velocity during take-off (+76.1% and 20.5%, respectively, P ≤ .001), 4) better vertical jump performance (+4.3%, P ≤ .0001), and 5) larger body angle rotation during landing (+63.3%, P = .006), compared to run-up vertical jump (effect size: 0.78 to 3.7). Conclusion In general, soccer players display greater vertical jump heights in heading test, which highlights the importance of including an overhead ball during soccer-specific jump tests. Coaches and practitioners are encouraged to assess, and perhaps develop, the jumping ability of soccer players using a suspended ball as a specific target.","PeriodicalId":48512,"journal":{"name":"Science and Medicine in Football","volume":"6 1","pages":"241 - 247"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/24733938.2021.1915495","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Medicine in Football","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24733938.2021.1915495","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

ABSTRACT Objective In soccer, vertical jump means jumping toward a ball. Since no vertical jump test includes the ball as a reference element, the effect that the ball would have in a vertical jump test is unknown. The aim of this study was to examine the biomechanical differences between run-up vertical jump measurements without (Run-up Vertical Jump) and with ball inclusion (Heading Test). Methods Twelve semi- and professional soccer players were recruited. Athletes performed both jump tests in a biomechanical laboratory, where kinetic and spatiotemporal variables were collected and compared using a Student’s dependent t-test for paired samples. Results Overall, players performed a different jumping strategy during the heading test compared to the run-up vertical jump, exhibiting: 1) higher horizontal velocity during initial contact (+45.3%, P ≤ .001), 2) shorter contact time, greater rate of force development, and total impulse during push-off (+27.5%, +53%, and +10.6%, respectively, P ≤ .008), 3) higher CoM horizontal and resultant velocity during take-off (+76.1% and 20.5%, respectively, P ≤ .001), 4) better vertical jump performance (+4.3%, P ≤ .0001), and 5) larger body angle rotation during landing (+63.3%, P = .006), compared to run-up vertical jump (effect size: 0.78 to 3.7). Conclusion In general, soccer players display greater vertical jump heights in heading test, which highlights the importance of including an overhead ball during soccer-specific jump tests. Coaches and practitioners are encouraged to assess, and perhaps develop, the jumping ability of soccer players using a suspended ball as a specific target.
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
从生物力学角度探讨足球运动员带球对跳跃性能的影响
【摘要】目的在足球比赛中,垂直起跳是指朝着球跳。因为没有垂直跳跃测试将球作为参考元素,所以球在垂直跳跃测试中的效果是未知的。本研究的目的是检查无助跑垂直跳(助跑垂直跳)和有球(头球测试)助跑垂直跳测量之间的生物力学差异。方法招募12名半职业足球运动员。运动员在生物力学实验室中进行两项跳跃测试,在那里收集动力学和时空变量,并使用成对样本的学生相关t检验进行比较。结果总体而言,运动员在头球测试中的跳跃策略与助跑垂直起跳不同,表现为:1)初始接触时水平速度更高(+45.3%,P≤0.001),2)接触时间更短,推力发展速度和总冲量更大(分别为+27.5%,+53%和+10.6%,P≤0.008),3)起飞时CoM水平和合成速度更高(分别为+76.1%和20.5%,P≤0.001),4)垂直起跳性能更好(+4.3%,P≤0.0001),5)着陆时身体角度旋转更大(+63.3%,P = 0.006)(效应大小:0.78 - 3.7)。总的来说,足球运动员在头球测试中表现出更高的垂直起跳高度,这突出了在足球专项起跳测试中加入头顶球的重要性。教练和实践者被鼓励去评估,也许是发展足球运动员的跳跃能力,用一个悬着的球作为一个特定的目标。
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
6.70
自引率
11.80%
发文量
69
期刊最新文献
Measures of (injury and illness) occurrence: a primer on epidemiological concepts and terminology for authors. The maturity status but not the relative age influences elite young football players’ physical performance Inter-methodological quantification of the target change for performance test outcomes relevant to elite female soccer players Author reply to Weaving et al.: comment on: ‘A contemporary multi-modal mechanical approach to training monitoring in elite professional soccer: a mathematical problem?’ The influence of relative playing area and player numerical imbalance on physical and perceptual demands in soccer small-sided game formats
×
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:481959085
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