1

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research Publish Ahead of Print

DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000001470

Title: Effects of an in-season plyometric training program on repeated change of direction

and sprint performance in the junior soccer player
Running title: Plyometric training and soccer performance
Laboratory

Research Unit Sport Performance & Health, Higher Institute of Sport and Physical
Education of Ksar Said, University of La Manouba, Tunis, Tunisia.

Authors affiliations

TE

Authors: Mehrz Hammami1, Yassine Negra1, Ridha Aouadi1,2, Roy J Shephard3 and
Mohamed Souhaiel Chelly1,2.

1. Research Unit Sport Performance & Health, Higher Institute of Sport and Physical
Education of Ksar Sad, University of La Manouba, Tunis, Tunisia.

C
EP

2: Higher Institute of Sport and Physical Education of Ksar Said, University of La

Manouba, Tunis, Tunisia.
3: Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON,
Canada.
Correspondance

Mohamed Souhaiel Chelly, Ph, D.

Institut Suprieur du Sport et de lEducation Physique de Ksar Said, la Manouba, 2010, Tunis,
Tunisie.
Phone : ++ 216 98 53 41 53

e-mail:csouhaiel@yahoo.fr

Acknowledgement:
The authors would like to thank the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research,
Tunis, Tunisia for financial support.

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

Manuscript R-371915 (Revision 1)

Abstract

We aimed to determine the gains in explosive movements of male junior soccer players
induced by incorporating an 8-week plyometric training program (PTP) into a standard soccer

TE

conditioning regimen 5 months after the beginning of the competitive season. Our hypothesis
was that PTP would enhance explosive movements, and thus sprint running, repeated shuttle
sprint ability (RSSA), agility and the ability to make repeated changes of direction (RCOD).

C
EP

A group of junior soccer players were randomly divided into two groups: an experimental
group (E, n=15, age 15.7 0.2 years) and a control group (C, n=13, age 15.8 0.2 years). E
and C performed training exercises and matches together, but for an 8-week period in the
latter part of the season the experimental group replaced a part of the normal regimen (the
tactical session) by a bi-weekly course of PTP (hurdle and drop jumps). Two familiarizations

sessions were held 2 weeks before definitive testing. The ability of the players was assessed
by 3 agility tests (a sprint test with 180 turns, a 9-3-6-3-9 m sprint with backward and

forward running and a four 5 m sprint test with turns); two repeated sprint tests (RSSA and
RCOD); and running times over 5m, 10m, 20m, 30 and 40m distances. E showed gains
relative to C in sprint times (p0.05 for 5m, 10m and 20m), and 2 of 3 the RCOD parameters
(RCOD best, p0.001; RCOD total, p0.05). However, with the pattern of plyometric training
that we adopted, and perhaps because participants were in good initial physical condition, the
agility and RSSA test scores remained unchanged. Nevertheless, we conclude that our PTP
can be commended to junior soccer players as a means of improving important components of
their physical performance.
Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

Keys Words: Sprint running, Agility, Repeated sprint ability, Change of direction.

INTRODUCTION

Soccer is the most widely practiced sport in the world (42). Successful players are
characterized by strength, power, and their derivatives (acceleration, sprinting, jumping and

TE

changes of direction) (20). During a typical soccer match, players alternate short bouts of
intense activity with longer periods of low-level, moderate-intensity exercise (23, 35, 39).
Sprinting occurs approximately every 90 seconds, each bout lasting 2-4 seconds (42).

C
EP

Castagna et al (7) founded that high-speed sprinting accounted for 3% of the total distance
covered by 12-year-old soccer players. Explosive actions requiring acceleration, jumping and
agility are also needed in response to the movements of an opposing player or the ball (40).
Agility is a necessary physical component of success in many sports, but it is
particularly important to the optimal performance of soccer players. Time and motion

analyses have demonstrated that soccer player perform many intermittent high-speed forward,
backward, and lateral movements during competition. In the context of soccer, agility

involves the ability to make such changes of direction and to start and stop rapidly (24), while
maintaining a correct body posture (41). A soccer player changes direction every 24 seconds
(45) and makes 1,2001,400 changes of direction during a game (2). Withers et al (47)
estimated that Australian soccer players made an average of 50 turns per game, and
Bloomfield et al (4) found that English soccer players turned and swerved 727 times within a
match. This type of agility can be developed by a training program that includes making
repeated changes of direction (RCOD) (41). RCOD training is important to preparation for
many field and court sports (18, 42). Wong del et al (49) defined such training as repeated

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

changes of direction with minimal recovery intervals between bouts; likewise repeated sprint
ability (RSA) is the ability to perform repeated straight sprints or shuttle sprints with minimal
recovery periods. Repeated changes of direction and repeated sprint ability make independent
contributions to a soccer player's ability (49).
Short-term muscle power is also crucial in many game situations. Both linear force

and parabolic powervelocity as determined by friction-loaded ergometers (9) are increased

slightly after 8 weeks of heavy resistance training (8, 9), with resulting improvements of

TE

sprinting and agility in both adults (20) and young athletes (17).

Plyometric training is recognized as a safe and effective method to improve explosive

actions and should be an important component of fitness programs for soccer players (3, 5). A
recent review paper and a meta-analysis (1, 4) have indicated that a twice-weekly plyometric

C
EP

training undertaken on nonconsecutive days for 8 weeks can enhance high intensity physical
abilities (e.g., agility, sprint). However, the potential contribution of plyometric training to the
development of sprinting and agility remain controversial. Chelly et al (9) found significant
increases in peak power output, jump force, jump height, and lower limb muscle volume in
junior soccer players, with gains of 5-40 m sprint velocity after completing an 8-week

plyometric training program that involved hurdling and depth jumping. Ramirez-Campillo et
al (31) also showed that a variety of plyometric exercises (unilateral; bilateral; and unilateral

+ bilateral counter-movement jumps) yielded a significant increase in muscular explosive

force and the change of direction speed in young soccer players. On the other hand, Herrero et
al (19) found no significant gains in 20-m sprint times except when 4 weeks of plyometric
training was combined with electromyostimulation. Brito et al (5) also noted that after 9
weeks of plyometric training, college male soccer players showed no difference in either 5-m
times or agility, although speeds were increased over a 20 m distance.

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

Discussion on the optimal form of plyometric training continues. De Villareal et al

(13) suggested that short-term plyometric training using a moderate volume of jumps
produced similar enhancements in jumping performance, but greater training efficiency
compared with training using a high volume of jumps. Ramirez-Campillo et al (30) found that
if a moderate plyometric training volume was conducted on a hard surface, the efficiency of

adaptations in reactive strength was doubled. Ramirez-Campillo et al (33) further suggested

that the replacement of technical exercises with low-volume high-intensity plyometric drop

TE

jump exercises was effective in improving several explosive actions and the endurance
capacity of youth soccer players, with a potential high transference into game performance.
Bedoya et al (3) suggested that the initial number of foot contacts should be 5060 per session
and ion order to prevent over-use injuries, it should increase to no more than 80120 foot

C
EP

contacts per session for any age group between 10 to 17 years old. However, Chu et al (11)
argued that the number of light, medium light, medium, medium hard and hard repetitions
should be 20, 30, 30 to 40, 50 to 60 and 40 to 75, respectively, per session. Based on these
conflicting opinions, we proposed to examine the effectiveness of high intensity plyometric
exercises (hurdle and deep jumps), setting the number of repetitions per session between 28 to

70 jumps (light to hard, according to Chu et al (11)).

Few investigators have examined the impact of plyometric training on repeated sprint

ability, and to our knowledge this is the first study to investigate effects on repeated changes
of direction. Our aim was thus to document the effects of a plyometric training program on
sprint speed, agility, repeated shuttle sprint ability and repeated changes of direction scores
for male junior soccer players who were initially in good overall physical condition. We
hypothesized that 8 weeks of combined hurdle and depth jumping would improve their sprint
speed, agility and repeated sprint ability with or without influencing repeated change of
direction scores.

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

METHODS
Experimental approach to the problem
We examined whether 8 weeks of biweekly in-season PTP would enhance selected aspects of
performance in in initially well-trained junior male soccer players relative to their peers who

continued to follow their customary in-season training regimen. A group of 28 juniors soccer
players (see Procedures and Evaluation for details of training) volunteered for random

TE

assignment to either a plyometric training group (E; n = 15) or a control group that continued
to follow the standard in-season regimen (C; n = 13). Both groups had been training for 5
months, and were already 4 months into the competitive season before introduction of the
modified training program. Data were collected before modification of training, and after

C
EP

completion of the 8-week trial. The test protocol included assessments of sprint performance
with measurement of times at 5m, 10m, 20m 30 and 40m; three agility tests (Sprint 4 X 5m (S
4 X 5m), Sprint 9-3-6-3-9 m with 180 turns (S 180) and Sprint 9-3-6-3-9 m with backward
and forward running (SBF); a repeated shuttle sprint ability test (RSSA) and a repeated
change-of-direction test (RCOD).

Initial and final test measurements were made at the same time of day, and under the
same experimental conditions, at least 3 days after the most recent competition. Participants

maintained their normal intake of food and fluids, but they abstained from physical exercise
for 1 day, drank no caffeine-containing beverages for 4 hours, and ate no food for 2 hours
before testing. Verbal encouragement ensured maximal effort throughout all tests.
Subjects
All procedures were approved by the University Institutional Review Committee for the
ethical use of human subjects, according to current national and international laws and
regulations. Informed consent was gained from the participants and their parent or guardian

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

after receiving both a verbal and a written explanation of the experimental protocol and its
potential risks and benefits. Participants were assured that they could withdraw from the trial
without penalty at any time. Twenty-eight male junior soccer players were drawn from a
single soccer team. All were examined by the team physician, with a particular focus on
conditions that might preclude coordination training. The physician determined maturation

status based on the development of pubic hair, using the Tanner 5-point scale. All participants
were found to be in good health, and in Pubertal Stage 4 or 5 (43). Subjects were randomly

TE

assigned between the experimental plyometric training group (E; n = 15) and a control group
(standard in-season regimen) (C; n = 13); (Table 1).

Our junior soccer players had achieved a good overall physical preparation at the beginning of

C
EP

the season (7 training sessions per week for 2 months). When the championship season began
(September) we emphasized resistance strength training with light loads (block working for 2
months), then we completed the first phase and qualified to the play-off phase. The present
investigation was undertaken during the second phase of the national championship (January
to March). The biweekly plyometric training program was introduced during this final phase.

***Table 1 about here***

Procedures and evaluation

The study was performed over an 8-week period, from January to March. Two familiarization

sessions were held 2 weeks before definitive testing. Measurements began when players were
4 months into the competitive season. Performance data were collected before modification of
their regimen, and after the experimental subjects had completed the 8-week period of
plyometric training. Initial and final test measurements were made at the same time of day,
and under the same experimental conditions, at least 3 days after the most recent competition,
and 5-9 days after the last plyometric session. Participants maintained their normal intake of

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

food and fluids, but abstained from physical exercise for 1 day, drank no caffeine-containing
beverages for 4 hours, and ate no food for 2 hours before testing. Verbal encouragement
ensured maximal effort throughout all tests. Evaluations of muscle function were completed
in a fixed order over 4 consecutive days.
Details of the plyometric training program

All subjects avoided any training other than that associated with the soccer team throughout
the study. Before the competitive season (August), all subjects had already engaged in 7

TE

training sessions per week for 2 months and had undertaken a light resistance training
program for both the upper and the lower limbs (twice weekly sessions with exercises that
used the body weight as a resistance). During the first part of the competitive season

C
EP

(September to December), subjects continued to train 4 to 5 times a week, participated in one

official soccer match every Sunday, and undertook a supplementary resistance training
session with light loads 3 times per month. During the second phase of the national
championship (January to March), the same routine was maintained, except that the
experimental group replaced their supplementary resistance training sessions with the

plyometric program. All participants also engaged in a once weekly school physical education
session; this lasted for 40 minutes and consisted mainly of ball games. All players thus began

the trial in a well-trained state, although none had previously engaged in a regular soccerspecific plyometric training program.
Details of the added plyometric training are given in Table 2. Sessions were always

supervised by the same coach, who was a part of the research team. Verbal encouragement
was given to ensure a high level of motivation throughout. Every Tuesday and Thursday for 8
weeks, the experimental subjects replaced a part of their standard regimen with plyometric
training. Standard sessions began with a 15-minute warm-up and lasted for 20 minutes.
Plyometric sessions began from rest with a 15-minute warm-up and they also lasted for some

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

20 minutes. Jumps were performed on a tartan track. Subjects were instructed to perform all
jumps to the maximal possible height with minimal ground contact time. Both hurdle and
drop jumps were performed with small angular knee movements; the ground was touched
with the balls of the feet only, thereby specifically stressing the calf muscles (25). Hurdling
comprised 7 to 10 continuous jumps over hurdles spaced at intervals of 1 m. Each set of drop

pause of 5 seconds between each rebound (25).

TE

***Table 2 about here***

jumps comprised 7 to 10 maximal rebounds after dropping from a 0.6-m to 0.7-m box, with a

Testing Schedule

Testing was integrated into the weekly training schedule. A standardized battery of warm-up

C
EP

exercises was performed before maximal efforts. Definitive tests were performed in a fixed
order over 3 days. On the first test day, anthropometric measurements were made, followed
by repeated sprinting 4 X 5m (S 4 X 5m) and sprinting over a 40 m distance with timers set at
5m, 10m, 20m 30 and 40m. The second day was devoted to sprinting 9-3-6-3-9 m with 180
turns (S 180), followed by repeated change-of-direction test (RCOD). During the third day,

subjects undertook the 9-3-6-3-9 m sprint with backward and forward running (SBF) and the
repeated shuttle sprint ability test (RSSA). Both field tests and the training program were

performed on a tartan surface.

Day 1

Anthropometry

The overall percentage of body fat was estimated from the biceps, triceps, subscapular, and
supra iliac skinfolds, using the equation of Durnin and Womersely for adolescent males aged
16-19.9 years (48):
% Body fat = (4.95/ (Density -4.5)) 100

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

10

where D = 1.1620.063 (LOG sum of 4 skinfolds)

Sprint 4 X 5m (S 4 X 5m)
The S 4 X 5m required frequent directional changes. Five cones were set 5 m apart. Subjects
stood with their feet apart and a cone between their legs. After an acoustic signal, they ran 5

m to point A; there, they made a 90 turn to the right and ran 5 m to point B. After a second
90 turn, they ran to point C, where they made an 180 turn and ran to the finish line (41). The

40m sprint performance

TE

intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for test-retest trials was 0.854.

The 40m sprint began with a standardized warm-up. Subjects then ran 40m, with times at 5m,

C
EP

10m, 20m, 30m and 40m recorded by a series of paired photocells (Microgate, Bolzano,
Italy). Three trials were separated by 6-8 min of recovery. Subjects began from a standing
position, with the front foot 0.2 m from the starting photocell beam. The intraclass ICC for
test-retest trials were 0.971, 0.989, 0.882, 0.945, and 0.995 for distances of 5-m, 10-m, 20-m,
30-m, and 40-m, respectively.
Day 2

Players performed the S180 followed by the RCOD. For the S180 (41), they ran 9 m from

the starting line to line A. Having touched line A with one foot, they made an 1800 left- or
right-hand turn. All subsequent turns were made in the same direction. They ran 3 m to line
B, made another 1800 turn, and ran 6 m forward. Then, they made another 1800 turn (line C)
and ran another 3 m forward (line C), before making the final turn and running 9 m to the
finish line.
The RCOD test comprised 6 X 20 m sprints, each beginning from a standing position,
0.2 m behind the sensor, with 25-second active recovery intervals (49). Times were measured
using infrared sensors (Microgate, Bolzano, Italy) located at the starting and finishing lines,
Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

11

0.5 m above the ground. Four 100 turns were made at 4 m intervals. During the active
recovery phase, subjects jogged slowly back to the starting line. The best time in a single trial
(RCODbest),

the

total

time

(RCODtotal)

and

the

decrement

(RCODdecrement,

RCODmean/RSSAbest expressed as a percentage) were determined.

Day 3

Sprint 9-3-6-3-9 m with backward and forward running (SBF)

The distance that the players had to cover was the same as in the S180 test. The only

TE

difference was that instead of making a turn, the players shifted from forward to backward
running. After the starting signal, they ran 9 m from starting line A to line B. Having touched
line B with one foot, the players shifted from running forward to running backward. Then,
they ran 3 m to line C and changed from backward running to forward running. After 6 m, the

C
EP

players made another change (line D) and ran another 3 m backward (line E) and then made
the final change and ran the final 9 m forward to the finish line (line F) (41). Each test was
carried out 3 times with a pause of 3 minutes between trials. The pause between the 2 tests
was 7.5 minutes. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for the test-retest trials were
0.959 for the first variety and 0.911 for the second one.

Repeated-shuttle-sprint Ability Test (RSSA)

Immediately after a warm-up, subjects completed a preliminary single shuttle-sprint test,

using a photocells system (Microgate, Bolzano, Italy). This first trial provided the criterion
score for the definitive shuttle sprint test (34). Subjects rested for 5min before starting the
definitive test. If the time for the first definitive sprint was 2.5% worse than the criterion
score, the test was repeated with maximum effort after a further 5-min rest. Subjects
performed six 20 + 20 m sprints with 180 turns, separated by 20 s of passive recovery (34).
Five seconds before the start of each sprint, subjects assumed the ready position and were
given a 5 s countdown to an acoustic signal. From the starting line, they sprinted for 20 m,

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

12

touched a second line with one foot and returned to the starting line as rapidly as possible.
After 20 s of passive recovery, the manoeuvre was repeated. The best time in a single trial
(RSSAbest), the mean time (RSSAmean), the total time (RSSAtotal) and the decrement
(RSSAdecrement, RSSAmean/RSSAbest expressed as a percentage) were determined.

Statistical Analyses
Statistical analyses were carried out using the SPSS 20 program for Windows (SPSS, Inc,

TE

Chicago, IL, USA). Normality of all variables was tested using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov
procedure. Levenes test was used to determine homogeneity of variance. Means and SDs
were calculated, using standard statistical methods. Training-related effects were assessed by
2-way analyses of variance with repeated measures (group x time). If a significant F value

C
EP

was observed, Tukeys post hoc procedure was applied to locate pair-wise differences. The
classification of effect sizes was determined by converting partial etasquared to Cohens d. The effect size is a measure of the effectiveness of a
treatment and it helps to determine whether a statistically significant

difference is a difference of practical concern. According to Cohen (12), effect

sizes can be classified as small (0.00 d 0.49), medium (0.50 d 0.79), and

large (d 0.80). The reliabilities of agility tests and sprint running performance
measurements were assessed using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) (46); all of our
measurements of agility and sprinting ability reached an acceptable level of reliability (r >
0.85) (Table 3). We accepted p0.05 as our criterion of statistical significance, whether a

positive or a negative difference was seen (i.e., a 2-tailed test was adopted).
****Table 3 about here****

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

13

RESULTS
The control group did not show any significant differences in anthropometric measures,
sprint, agility, RSSA, RCOD or over the 8-week trial. However, the plyometric training
program induced significant increases in sprint times for the experimental group over
distances of 5m, 10m and 20m (p0.05) (Table 4). None of the 3 agility tests showed any

significant gains for the experimental group (S180, SBF and S 4 X 5 had respective p values
of 0.08, 0.06 and 0.142) (Table 4). Two of the 3 RCOD scores (RCODbest ; RCODtotal)

TE

improved significantly for the experimental subjects (p<0.01 and p<0.05 respectively),
whereas the RCOD decrement remained unchanged (Table 5). No significant changes of
RSSA performance were seen (Table 5).

C
EP

****Table 4 about here****

****Table 5 about here****

DISCUSSION

The aim of the present study was to assess the effectiveness of an 8-week plyometric training
program as a means of improving sprinting, agility, RSSA and RCOD scores for junior soccer

players. The answer to these questions was strongly positive relative to standard training for
some tests (5m, 10m, 20m sprint times), but was not statistically significant for other tests

(30m and 40m sprint times; agility tests and RSSA). The program was of a duration that
others have found effective, and the players were well-motivated with no evidence of overtraining; we think the lack of response to some aspects of their ability most likely reflects the
fact that they were already in good physical condition when the plyometric program was
introduced.
Many previous studies, including a recent meta-analysis (37), have found a decrease in

sprint times with plyometric training (9, 14, 32, 37, 38). Our results are consonant with these

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

14

findings, with times for distances of 5m ; 10m ; 20m ; 30m ; and 40m improving
substantially, by 7.8% ; 5.8% ; 4.6% ; 3.5% ; 3.7% respectively. The plyometric training
program that we used in this study was approximately similar to that proposed by Chelly et al
(9); in the earlier study, we also observed increases in both acceleration (5m) and maximal
speed (0-40m) phases relative to controls (p<0.001 ; p<0.01 respectively). All our results

(except 30m and 40m ; Table 4) coincided with those reported by Diallo et al (14) for
prepubescent soccer players who engaged in plyometric training thrice weekly for 10 weeks.

TE

On the other hand, Thomas et al (44) found that in post-adolescent semi-professional players,
6 weeks of either depth jumping or counter-movement jumping improved jumping ability, but
did not enhance the sprint performance of their group. Herrero et al (19) also found no effect
on 20 m sprint times in a group of physical education students, perhaps in part because

C
EP

subjects only undertook 8 sessions of plyometric training. Markovic et al (25) also evaluated
physical education students, finding no improvements in 20-m sprint times after a 10 week
program of hurdles and drop jumps. Discrepant findings probably reflect differences in
methodology (for instance, the testing of post-adolescent vs. much younger soccer players;
elite or professional players vs. regional level players; the format of the plyometric exercises,

the frequency, duration and progression of training, and its timing relative to the playing
season). In terms of training intensity, volume, and exercise selection we followed the

principle of progressive overload, starting with lower intensities, single-joint exercises, and
less complex exercise techniques, and progressing to higher intensities, multi-joint exercise,
and more complex techniques (32, 37). The optimal approach to enhancing sprint
performance seems to incorporate greater horizontal acceleration (skipping, jumping with
horizontal displacement) (37). Gains of sprint performance reflect neural adaptations such as
an increased nerve conduction velocity, maximizing of the electromyogram, improved intermuscular coordination, an enhanced motor unit recruitment strategy, and an increased

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

15

excitability of the Hoffman reflex (H-reflex) (1, 15, 26, 28, 29, 50), as well as changes in
muscle size and architecture, in the mechanical characteristics of the muscle-tendon complex,
and changes in single-fibre mechanics (26).
Several previous reports have noted gains of agility following plyometric training.
Ramirez-Campillo et al (31) found significant increases in the agility of young soccer players.

Likewise, Meylan et al (27) found that the agility test-time of adolescent players was
decreased by -9.6% in response to 8 weeks of jumping, hurdling, bouncing, skipping, and

TE

footwork. Garcia-Pinillos et al (16) also reported that 12 weeks of contrast training (isometric
+ plyometric) increased Balsom agility test scores in adolescent soccer players, and Thomas
et al (44) noted gains in agility times in post-adolescent semi-professional players in response
to 6 weeks of either depth jumping or counter-movement jumping. Other studies have used

C
EP

agility tests lasting from 7 to 19 seconds and covering distances of 40 to 50-m (10, 36) cannot
be compared with our findings. One negative report (5) saw no difference in either the 5-m
speed or the agility of male college soccer players after 9 weeks of plyometric training. A
review of 6 studies by Markovic and Mikulic (26) found +1.5-10.2% gains in the agility of
soccer players with plyometric training. In our study, the S180, SBF and S 4 X 5 tests

differed somewhat from each other in terms of the distance covered, the number of change of
direction, and the angle of directional change, but the findings agreed in showing that our

plyometric training program did not enhance agility. The lack of response in our study could
reflect the intensity and duration of training, the age and type of test population, the fact that
the players were initially in good physical condition and our choice of agility tests (duration,
number of change of direction, and angle of change of direction).
Our study revealed no significant difference in RSSA parameters with plyometric
training. The only previous investigation seems that of Buchheit et al (6); they observed that
repeated shuttle sprint training (10 weeks) (RS) improved RSSAbest and mean RSSAmean

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

16

times on a repeated shuttle sprint test more than did explosive strength training (-2.90 2.1
vs. -0.08 3.3%, p = 0.04 and -2.61 2.8 vs. -0.75 2.5%, p = 0.10, effect size [ES] = 0.70
in RSSAbest and RSSAmean respectively) in elite adolescent soccer players.
To the best of our knowledge, the present investigation is the first to have studied the
effects of plyometric training on the ability of adolescent soccer players to change direction

repeatedly. We found that plyometric training enhanced 2 of our 3 RCOD parameters. One
possible explanation of the lack of significant change in RCODdecrement could be its poor

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS

TE

reproducibility (21).

The current study indicates that 8 weeks of bi-weekly in-season plyometric training enhances

C
EP

sprint speeds and the ability to make repeated change of direction in male adolescent soccer
players. It proved quite practicable to incorporate this plyometric training element into
traditional in-season technical and tactical male soccer training sessions, thus enhancing the
performance potential of our players. There are many potential neuromuscular explanations of
the observed changes in performance, and these merit further investigation; as mechanisms

become better understood, it may be possible to modify plyometric initiatives to realize even
larger gains of performance and to bring about gains in agility and repeated sprint ability.

There is also a need to establish how much plyometric training adds to other methods of
enhancing the capabilities of the soccer player, such as heavy resistance work and change of
direction training.

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

17

References
1.

Aagaard P, Simonsen EB, Andersen JL, Magnusson P, and Dyhre-Poulsen P.

Increased rate of force development and neural drive of human skeletal muscle
following resistance training. J Appl Physiol (1985) 93: 1318-1326, 2002.

2.

Bangsbo J. Time and motion characteristics of competition soccer. Science Football 6:

3.

34-40, 1992.
Bedoya AA, Miltenberger MR, and Lopez RM. Plyometric Training Effects on

Cond Res 29: 2351-2360, 2015.

4.

TE

Athletic Performance in Youth Soccer Athletes: A Systematic Review. J Strength

Bloomfield J, Polman R, and O'Donoghue P. Physical demands of different positions

5.

C
EP

in FA premier league soccer. J Sports Sci Med 6: 63-70, 2007.

Brito J, Vasconcellos F, Oliveira J, Krustrup P, and Rebelo A. Short-term performance

effects of three different low-volume strength-training programmes in college male
soccer players. J Hum Kinet 40: 121-128, 2014.

6.

Buchheit M, Mendez-Villanueva A, Delhomel G, Brughelli M, and Ahmaidi S.

Improving repeated sprint ability in young elite soccer players: repeated shuttle sprints
vs. explosive strength training. J Strength Cond Res 24: 2715-2722, 2010.
Castagna C, D'Ottavio S, and Abt G. Activity profile of young soccer players during

7.

actual match play. J Strength Cond Res 17: 775-780, 2003.

8.

Chelly MS, Fathloun M, Cherif N, Ben Amar M, Tabka Z, and Van Praagh E. Effects

of a back squat training program on leg power, jump, and sprint performances in
junior soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 23: 2241-2249, 2009.
9.

Chelly MS, Ghenem MA, Abid K, Hermassi S, Tabka Z, and Shephard RJ. Effects of
in-season short-term plyometric training program on leg power, jump- and sprint
performance of soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 24: 2670-2676, 2010.

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

18

10.

Christou M, Smilios I, Sotiropoulos K, Volaklis K, Pilianidis T, and Tokmakidis SP.

Effects of resistance training on the physical capacities of adolescent soccer players. J
Strength Cond Res 20: 783-791, 2006.
Chu D. Jumping into Plyometrics. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1998.

12.

Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Erlbaum, 1988.

13.

de Villarreal ES, Gonzalez-Badillo JJ, and Izquierdo M. Low and moderate plyometric

11.

training frequency produces greater jumping and sprinting gains compared with high

14.

TE

frequency. J Strength Cond Res 22: 715-725, 2008.

Diallo O, Dore E, Duche P, and Van Praagh E. Effects of plyometric training followed
by a reduced training programme on physical performance in prepubescent soccer
players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 41: 342-348, 2001.

Dietz V, Schmidtbleicher D, and Noth J. Neuronal mechanisms of human locomotion.

C
EP

15.

J Neurophysiol 42: 1212-1222, 1979.

16.

Garcia-Pinillos F, Martinez-Amat A, Hita-Contreras F, Martinez-Lopez EJ, and

Latorre-Roman PA. Effects of a contrast training program without external load on
vertical jump, kicking speed, sprint, and agility of young soccer players. J Strength

17.

Cond Res 28: 2452-2460, 2014.

Gorostiaga EM, Izquierdo M, Ruesta M, Iribarren J, Gonzalez-Badillo JJ, and Ibanez

J. Strength training effects on physical performance and serum hormones in young

soccer players. Eur J Appl Physiol 91: 698-707, 2004.

18.

Haj-Sassi R, Dardouri W, Gharbi Z, Chaouachi A, Mansour H, Rabhi A, and

Mahfoudhi ME. Reliability and validity of a new repeated agility test as a measure of
anaerobic and explosive power. J Strength Cond Res 25: 472-480, 2011.

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

19

19.

Herrero JA, Izquierdo M, Maffiuletti NA, and Garcia-Lopez J. Electromyostimulation

and plyometric training effects on jumping and sprint time. Int J Sports Med 27: 533539, 2006.

20.

Hoff J and Helgerud J. Endurance and strength training for soccer players:
physiological considerations. Sports Med 34: 165-180, 2004.
Impellizzeri FM, Rampinini E, Castagna C, Bishop D, Ferrari Bravo D, Tibaudi A,

21.

and Wisloff U. Validity of a repeated-sprint test for football. Int J Sports Med 29: 899-

22.

TE

905, 2008.

Johnson BA, Salzberg CL, and Stevenson DA. A systematic review: plyometric
training programs for young children. J Strength Cond Res 25: 2623-2633, 2011.

23.

Krustrup P, Mohr M, Ellingsgaard H, and Bangsbo J. Physical demands during an

C
EP

elite female soccer game: importance of training status. Med Sci Sports Exerc 37:
1242-1248, 2005.
24.

Little T and Williams AG. Specificity of acceleration, maximum speed, and agility in
professional soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 19: 76-78, 2005.

25.

Markovic G, Jukic I, Milanovic D, and Metikos D. Effects of sprint and plyometric

training on muscle function and athletic performance. J Strength Cond Res 21: 543549, 2007.

Markovic G and Mikulic P. Neuro-musculoskeletal and performance adaptations to

26.

lower-extremity plyometric training. Sports Med 40: 859-895, 2010.

27.

Meylan C and Malatesta D. Effects of in-season plyometric training within soccer

practice on explosive actions of young players. J Strength Cond Res 23: 2605-2613,
2009.

28.

Moritani T. Neuromuscular adaptations during the acquisition of muscle strength,

power and motor tasks. J Biomech 1: 95-107, 1993.

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

20

29.

Nummela A, Rusko H, and Mero A. EMG activities and ground reaction forces during
fatigued and nonfatigued sprinting. Med Sci Sports Exerc 26: 605-609, 1994.

30.

Ramirez-Campillo R, Andrade DC, and Izquierdo M. Effects of plyometric training

volume and training surface on explosive strength. J Strength Cond Res 27: 27142722, 2013.
Ramirez-Campillo R, Gallardo F, Henriquez-Olguin C, Meylan C, Martinez C,

31.

Alvarez C, Caniuqueo A, Cadore EL, and Izquierdo M. Effect of vertical, horizontal

TE

and combined plyometric training on explosive, balance and endurance performance

of young soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 2014: 31, 2014.
32.

Ramirez-Campillo R, Henriquez-Olguin C, Burgos C, Andrade D, Zapata D, Martinez

C, Alvarez C, Baez EI, Castro-Sepulveda M, Penailillo L, and Izquierdo M. Effect of

C
EP

progressive volume-based overload during plyometric training on explosive and

endurance performance in young soccer players. J Strength Cond Res: 31, 2014.
33.

Ramirez-Campillo R, Meylan C, Alvarez C, Henriquez-Olguin C, Martinez C, CanasJamett R, Andrade DC, and Izquierdo M. Effects of in-season low-volume highintensity plyometric training on explosive actions and endurance of young soccer

34.

players. J Strength Cond Res 28: 1335-1342, 2014.

Rampinini E, Bishop D, Marcora SM, Ferrari Bravo D, Sassi R, and Impellizzeri FM.

Validity of simple field tests as indicators of match-related physical performance in

top-level professional soccer players. Int J Sports Med 28: 228-235, 2007.

35.

Reilly T. Energetics of high-intensity exercise (soccer) with particular reference to

fatigue. J Sports Sci 15: 257-263, 1997.

36.

Reilly T, Williams AM, Nevill A, and Franks A. A multidisciplinary approach to

talent identification in soccer. J Sports Sci 18: 695-702, 2000.

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

21

37.

Saez de Villarreal E, Requena B, and Cronin JB. The effects of plyometric training on
sprint performance: a meta-analysis. J Strength Cond Res 26: 575-584, 2012

38.

Sedano S, Matheu A, Redondo JC, and Cuadrado G. Effects of plyometric training on

explosive strength, acceleration capacity and kicking speed in young elite soccer
players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 51: 50-58, 2011.
Shephard RJ. The energy needs of the soccer player. Clin J Sports Med 2: 62-70,

39.

1992.

Sheppard JM and Young WB. Agility literature review: classifications, training and
testing. J Sports Sci 24: 919-932, 2006.

41.

TE

40.

Sporis G, Jukic I, Milanovic L, and Vucetic V. Reliability and factorial validity of

42.

C
EP

agility tests for soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 24: 679-686, 2010.

Stolen T, Chamari K, Castagna C, and Wisloff U. Physiology of soccer: an update.

Sports Med 35: 501-536, 2005.

43.

Tanner JM. Growth at adolescence. London, Great Britain.: Blackwell Scientific

Publication, 1962.

Thomas K, French D, and Hayes PR. The effect of two plyometric training techniques

44.

on muscular power and agility in youth soccer players. J Strength Cond Res 23: 332-

335, 2009.
45.

Verheijen R. Handbuch fur Fussballkondition. Leer, Germany: BPF Versand, 1997.

46.

Vincent W. Statistics in Kinesiology. Human Kinetics, 1995.

47.

Withres R, Maricic Z, Wasilewski S, and Kelly L. Match analysis of australian soccer

players. J Hum Mov Stud 8: 159-176., 1982.

48.

Womersley J and Durnin J. An experimental study on variability of measurements of

skinfold thickness on young adults. Hum Biol 45: 281-292, 1973.

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

22

49.

Wong del P, Chan GS, and Smith AW. Repeated-sprint and change-of-direction
abilities in physically active individuals and soccer players: training and testing
implications. J Strength Cond Res 26: 2324-2330, 2012.

50.

Wu Y, Lien Y, and Lin K. Relationships between three potentiation effects of

C
EP

TE

plyometric training and performance. Scand J Med Sci Sports: 80-86, 2009.

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

Table 1: Physical characteristics of experimental and control groups (mean SD).

Control (n=13)

Age (years)

15.7 0.2

15.8 0.2

Height (m)

1.76 0.06

1.69 0.05

Body mass (kg)

59.0 6.5

58.2 5.0

Body fat %

9.1 2.2

11.4 2.9

C
EP

TE

Experimental (n=15)

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

Table 2: Plyometric components introduced into the training programme of the experimental

Sets

Reps

0.5 m hurdle jump

0.5 m hurdle jump

10

0.6 m hurdle jump

10

0.6 m hurdle jump

10

0.6 m drop jump

0.6 m drop jump

10

0.7 m drop jump

0.7 m drop jump

TE

Exercice

C
EP

Week

group.

10

Reps : repetition

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

Table 3: Interclass correlation coefficient showing acceptable reliability of track running

5m(s)

0.971

0.905-0.979

10m(s)

0.989

0.928-0.984

20m(s)

0.882

0.690-0.933

30m(s)

0.945

0.832-0.964

40m(s)

0.995

0.973-0.994

S180

0.959

0.709-0.937

SBF

0.911

0.559-0.904

S4 X 5

0.854

0.472-0.885

TE

95%CI

C
EP

ICC

velocity and agility.

S180 = the sprint 9-3-6-3-9 m with 180 turns (S180); SBF = the sprint 9-3-6-3-9 m with
backward and forward running (SBF); S4*5 = the sprint 4 3 5 m (S4*5) ; ICC = interclass

correlation coefficient ; CI = confidence interval.

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

Table 4: Comparison of sprint running and agility test performance between experimental and control groups
before and after 8-week trial.
Experimental (n=15)

Control (n=13)

Pre

Post

Pre

Post

P value

D (Cohen)

1.090.06

1.010.09*

1.060.11

1.100.10

0.135 a

0.418

0.393 b

0.238

0.014 c

0.706

Anova

20m (s)

30m (s)

40m (s)

1.860.07

3.230.12

4.510.17

5.780.27

Agility

SBF (s)

S4 X 5 (s)

3.080.16*

4.350.21

5.560.25

8.340.42

8.750.43

S180 (s)

1.750.11*

1.880.16

3.220.24

4.530.36

1.900.16

8.850.29

6.280.25

8.440.38

6.090.26

5.930.40

8.380.33

8.560.34

6.210.28

0.014 a

0.706

0.218 b

0.345

0.057 c

0.540

0.066 a

0.523

0.368 b

0.255

0.058 c

0.536

0.108 a

0.454

0.433 b

0.220

0.186 c

0.369

0.024 a

0.648

0.088 b

0.482

0.499 c

0.190

0.125 a

0.434

0.055 b

0.544

0.081 c

0.491

0.324 a

0.278

0.010 b

0.745

0.061 c

0.531

0.610 a

0.141

0.199 b

0.363

0.142 c

0.413

TE

10m (s)

3.270.24

4.570.35

C
EP

5m (s)

Sprint

5.830.42

8.360.45

8.670.43

6.230.23

S180: the sprint 9-3-6-3-9 m with 180 turns (S180); SBF: the sprint 9-3-6-3-9 m with backward and forward
running (SBF); S4 X 5: the sprint 4 X 5 m (S4 X 5) ; a: denotes a main effect group; b: denotes a main effect of
time; c = denote a main effect group*time. Note: A 2-way analysis of variance (group x time) assessed the
statistical significance of training-related effects: * p0.05.

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association

Table 5: Comparison of Repeated-Shuttle-Sprint Ability and Repeated Change of Direction test scores between

Experimental (n=15)

Control (n=13)

Anova

Pre

Pre

Post

P value

D (Cohen)

7.440.36

7.350.35

0.269 a

0.306

0.196 b

0.363

0.865 c

0.063

0.004 a

0.830

TE

experimental and control groups before and after 8-week trial.

0.119 b

0.439

0.166 c

0.392

0.536 a

0.167

0.050 b

0.557

0.586 c

0.155

6.630.29

0.000 a

1.980

0.697 b

0.109

0.001 c

0.946

0.548 a

0.167

0.646 b

0.126

0.105 c

0.458

0.000 a

1.853

0.843 b

0.063

0.010 c

0.745

Post

RSSAbest (s)

7.370.17

RSSAdecremnet (s)

8.672.82

46.381.36

6.622.80

45.101.77

6.092.46

45.642.33

C
EP

RSSAtotal (s)

7.250.25

Repeated-Shuttle-Sprint Ability

5.952.00

45.662.29

Repeated Change of Direction

RCODbest (s)

6.310.09

38.602.46

4.451.89

37.012.36*

5.333.31

40.801.59

6.890.31

4.251.28

42.171.92

RCODtotal (s)

4.131.92

RCODdecrement (s)

6.050.36**

RSSA: Repeated-Shuttle-Sprint Ability; RCOD: Repeated Change Of Direction; a: denotes a main effect group;
b: denotes a main effect of time; c = denote a main effect group*time.
Note: A 2-way analysis of variance (group x time) assessed the statistical significance of training-related effects.
*: p0.05: **: p0.01.

Copyright 2016 National Strength and Conditioning Association