4.2 Article

Relationship between relative age measured through decimal age, physical variables and anthropometry in elite youth soccer players

期刊

PHYSICIAN AND SPORTSMEDICINE
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00913847.2023.2258768

关键词

Academy; body composition; football; performance; strength; young

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Relative Age Effect (RAE) is caused by age differences and over-representation of older players among athletes. Players born at the beginning of the selection year have an advantage in physical and anthropometric attributes. This study aims to correlate anthropometric, strength, and power variables with relative age (RA) and the level of teams in each age category.
IntroductionAge differences between athletes born in the same year, as well as an over-representation of older players, are known as the Relative Age Effect (RAE). Players born at the beginning of the selection year have a physical and anthropometric advantage over their younger peers. Experts keep looking for new prediction variables for talent identification.ObjectivesThe aim of the study is to correlate anthropometric, strength and power variables with the relative age (RA) and the level of the teams in which players played in each age category.MethodsAll players (N = 366) from an elite soccer academy of a Spanish club volunteered to participate in the study (U23-U10).ResultsThere was a significant correlation between the RA of the players and the level of the team in which they played in each age category but no correlation between trimester of birth and level of the team. We found significant correlations between the players' physical capacities, anthropometry, RA and the level of the team in which they played for the same age category, mainly from U16 to U10. U23 did not show any correlation between RA and physical or anthropometric variables.ConclusionCoaches should be cautious of choosing players based only on anthropometric or physical attributes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据