Content uploaded by Martin Buchheit
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Martin Buchheit on Apr 29, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
This article was downloaded by: [193.95.44.202]
On: 10 September 2013, At: 05:55
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Sports Sciences
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjsp20
Football-specific fitness testing: adding value or
confirming the evidence?
Alberto Mendez-Villanueva
a
& Martin Buchheit
a
a
ASPIRE Academy for Sports Excellence , Doha , Qatar
To cite this article: Alberto Mendez-Villanueva & Martin Buchheit (2013) Football-specific fitness testing: adding value or
confirming the evidence?, Journal of Sports Sciences, 31:13, 1503-1508, DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2013.823231
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2013.823231
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
POINT-COUNTER-POINT ARTICLE
Football-specific fitness testing: adding value or confirming the
evidence?
ALBERTO MENDEZ-VILLANUEVA & MARTIN BUCHHEIT
ASPIRE Academy for Sports Excellence, Doha, Qatar
(Accepted 22 June 2013)
Keywords: testing, football, performance
In the search for the ultimate competitive edge, in the
last years, professional football (soccer) clubs have sub-
stantially increased their budget allocation for sport
science personnel and support. Among others, the
assessment of players’ physical fitness is a major part
of the sport science service. Physical fitness testing is
typically conducted several times per year to evaluate
different physical qualities (e.g., aerobic fitness, speed,
agility, and strength and power), which are to some
degree thought to be related to match play physical
performance. In the recent years, an increasing number
of so-called “football-specific fitness tests” have been
gaining momentum and their use in professio nal foot-
ball has rapidly widespread. Typically, such football-
specific fitness te sts are generally deemed “specific” as
long as they can show some sort of logical, construct
and/or other forms of validity (Impellizzeri & Marcora,
2009). Football-specific tests of speed (Rampinini
et al., 2007), aerobic fitness (Bangsbo, Iaia, &
Krustrup, 2008), agility (Bullock, Panchuk, Broatch,
Christian, & Stepto, 2012; Sporis, Jukic, Milanovic, &
Vucetic, 2010) and dribbling ability (Huijgen, Elferink-
Gemser, Post, & Visscher, 2009) have bee n “validated”
and are no w implemented in ma ny football cl ubs and
academies worldwide. Despite their proposed scientific
robustness, perceived practicality and the increasing
popularity, whether these football-specific fitness tests
can really bring new information to the team and indi-
vidual players can still be questioned.
As most sprints during a football game have been
shown to happen over distances inferior to 10 metres
(Di Salvo et al., 2010), 5- to 10-m sprints are consid-
ered as extr emely football-specific speed tests. That is,
there is no doubt that a 5-m sprint test has good logical
validity. As such, 5-m sprint times are considered as
highly relevant and useful for the coaching staff and
players. However, while it is nice to put an actual
“number” on a player’s acceleration capacity (i.e., 5-
m sprint test), does this assessment really translates into
new and meaningful information for the coaching staff
and players? First, with respect to the assessment of a
players’ locomotor profile, reality is that, in most cases,
coaches already know who the fast players are. Thus, in
most cases, a 5-m sprint test could just confirm some-
thing that was already evident for the coaching staff.
Accordingly, knowledge of a player’s 5-m sprint time is
actually unlikely to change how coaches perceive his/
her potential and playing skills. In contrast to other
sport s (e.g. , tr ack and field), a lack of speed (or any
other fitness quality) in football has always to be put
first in relation to playing roles and tactical demands.
We believe that as long as a player is able to do his/her
“job” satisfactorily on the field, all other (physical)
considerations are secondary (Delgado-Bordonau &
Mendez-Villanueva, 2012). Along these lines of think-
ing, the real problem for a player is not to be slow per se,
but no t to be a good football player because of a lack of
speed or acceleration. In this latter case, an under-
standing of the causes/factors responsible for the poor
5-m sprint time and, in turn, diminished potential foot-
ball ability, would be highly valuable to the coaches and
players, e.g., to potentially built up an individual
Correspondence: Alberto Mendez-Villanueva, Football Physiology Unit, Football Performance & Science Department, ASPIRE Academy of Sports
Excellence, P.O. Box 22287, Doha, Qatar. E-mail: jose.villanueva@aspire.qa
Journal of Sports Sciences, 2013
Vol. 31, No. 13, 1503–1508, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2013.823231
© 2013 Taylor & Francis
Downloaded by [193.95.44.202] at 05:55 10 September 2013
traini ng intervention. Finally, since in reality, a foot-
ball-specific speed test (i.e., 5-m) might not be that
informative to coaches, scientists and players, the
potential interest of other running speed parameters
might need to be considered. We believe that, in addi-
tion to the 5-m sprint times, the assessment of maximal
sprinting speed (MSS) (Buchheit, Simpson, Peltola, &
Mendez-Villanueva, 2012) has clear applications and
might reveal “hidden” information to the coaching
staff. While this running speed is unlikely reached dur-
ing games (Mendez-Villanueva, Buchheit, Simpson,
Peltola, & Bourdon, 2011), it directly determines the
relative neuromuscular load/strain that players encoun-
ter during games and training session (Mendez-
Villanueva , Buchheit, Simpson, & Bourdo n, 2013).
This kind of information can be highly valuable when
programming individual training plans and exercise
intensities, monitoring training/competitive load and
for the management of injured players.
The present discussion can also be extended to the
aerobic fitness assessment throughout football-specific
intermittent field tests, such as the Yo-Yo tests (Bangsbo
et al., 2008).The outcome measure of these tests (i.e.,
total distance covered) has been shown to be related,
among others, to factors such as maximal oxygen uptake
(Bangsbo et al., 2008), metabolic control (Rampinini
et al., 2010), acid–base status (Rampinini et al., 2010),
explosive leg power (Castagna, Impellizzeri, Chamari,
Carlomagno, & Rampinini, 2006) and potentially to
acceleration capacity and the ability to change directio n.
That is, Yo-Yo performance is a compound quality
which depends on a myriad of physical fitness factors.
As such, a given Yo-Yo performance can be achieved
while taxing the above-mentioned physiological deter-
minants at a fairly different extent (e.g., a player might
compensate his poor aerobic power by a great anaerobic
capacity to reach a similar Yo-Yo performance than a
player with an opposite physiological profile). In prac-
tice, with a Yo-Yo performance, what kind of specific
training recommendations can be given to the player
and coaching staff? Concluding that due to a poor Yo-
Yo test result, a player has to improve his/her ability to
repeat high-intensity exercise is actually very simplistic
and not informative at all. Analogously, this is similar to
say that a slow player has to improve his ability to run
faster. In addition , high-i ntensity intermittent exercise
performance has also to be seen in relation to its possible
impact 1) on match running performance, which is likely
position-dependent (Buchheit, Mendez-Villanueva,
Simpson, & Bourdon, 2010), and more importantly,
2) match play technical/tactical performance. Similar
to the above example on the 5-m sprint time, most likely
coaches would already know if a player has or not the
ability to perform (and repeat) high-intensity actions,
and whether this is actually problematic or not for his
technical/tactical game performance. Again, such a fit-
ness assessment only confirms what was likely already
evident to most coaches. If poor playing performance
was actually to be linked to a poor ability to repeated
high-intensity exercise, how a test that quantifies some-
thing which is already evident could help in identifying
the actual problem?
Another obvious limitation of these kind of tests, is
that their final performance do not represent a clear
locomotor entity (Dupont et al., 2010), so that they
cannot be used for training prescription. We therefore
adhere to the assessment of a combination of isolated
physical capacities, including, among others, maximal
aerobic speed (MAS). While its assessment is every-
thing but specific (it involves continuous running
without changes of direction), MAS is the only field-
based measure that reflects a player’s maximal aerobic
power, integrated with his/her running economy (di
Prampero et al., 1986). In practice, MAS can be used
as a reference for programming high-intensity training
(Dupont, Akakpo, & Berthoin, 2004), and when it is
put in relation to either Yo-Yo or match running
performance, the relative physical strain of such exer-
cises ca n be estimated.
To conclude, while appealing, excessive reliance
on football-specific fitness tests can easily end up
with sport scientists playing a limited role of “evi-
dence providers”, rather than substantially impacting
players and teams’ performances. We believe that
football sport scientists working in professional set-
tings should not (only) test to confirm evidences, but
also try to implement testing batteries aimed at
improving the profiling of players’ physical and phy-
siological capacity, which, in turn, is more likely to
impact soccer-specifi
c movement patterns and ulti-
mately, competitive performance.
References
Bangsbo, J., Iaia, F. M., & Krustrup, P. (2008). The Yo-Yo inter-
mittent recovery test: A useful tool for evaluation of physical
performance in intermittent sports. Sports Medicine, 38,37–51.
Buchheit, M., Mendez-Villanueva, A., Simpson, B. M., &
Bourdon, P. C. (2010). Match running performance and fit-
ness in youth soccer. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 31,
818–825.
Buchheit, M., Simpson, B. M., Peltola, E., & Mendez-Villanueva,
A. (2012). Assessing maximal sprinting speed in highly trained
young soccer players. International Journal of Sports Physiology
and Performance, 7,76–78.
Bullock, W., Panchuk, D., Broatch, J., Christian, R., & Stepto, N.
K. (2012). An integrative test of agility, speed and skill in
soccer: Effects of exercise. Journal of Science and Medicine in
Sport, 15, 431–436.
Castagna, C., Impellizzeri, F. M., Chamari, K., Carlomagno, D., &
Rampinini, E. (2006). Aerobic fitness and yo-yo continuous and
intermittent tests performances in soccer players: A correlation
study. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 20,320–325.
Delgado-Bordonau, J., & Mendez-Villanueva, A. (2012). Tactical
periodization: Mourinho’s best-kept secret? Soccer NSCAA
Journal, 3,28–34.
1504 A. Mendez-Villanueva & M. Buchheit
Downloaded by [193.95.44.202] at 05:55 10 September 2013
di Prampero, P. E., Atchou, G., Bruckner, J. C., & Moia, C.
(1986). The energetics of endurance running. European
Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology, 55,
259–266.
Di Salvo, V., Baron, R., Gonzalez-Haro, C., Gormasz, C.,
Pigozzi, F., & Bachl, N. (2010). Sprinting analysis of elite
soccer players during European Champions League and
UEFA Cup matches. Journal of Sports Science, 28,1489–
1494.
Dupont, G., Akakpo, K., & Berthoin, S. (2004). The effect of in-
season, high-intensity interval training in soccer players. Journal
of Strength and Conditioning Research, 18, 584–589.
Dupont, G., Defontaine, M., Bosquet, L., Blondel, N., Moalla,
W., & Berthoin, S. (2010). Yo-Yo intermittent recovery test
versus the Universite de Montreal Track Test: Relation with a
high-intensity intermittent exercise. Journal of Science and
Medicine in Sport, 13, 146–150.
Huijgen, B. C., Elferink-Gemser, M. T., Post, W. J., & Visscher,
C. (2009). Soccer skill development in professionals.
International Journal of Sports Medicine, 30, 585–591.
Impellizzeri, F. M., & Marcora, S. M. (2009). Test validation in
sport physiology: Lessons learned from clinimetrics.
International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 4,
269–277.
Mendez-Villanueva, A., Buchheit, M., Simpson, B. M., & Bourdon,
P. C. (2013). Match play intensity distribution in youth soccer.
International Journal of Sports Medicine, 34,101–110.
Mendez-Villanueva, A., Buchheit, M., Simpson, B., Peltola, E., &
Bourdon, P. (2011). Does on-field sprinting performance in
young soccer players depend on how fast they can run or how
fast they do run? Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research,
25, 2634–2638.
Rampinini, E., Bishop, D., Marcora, S. M., Ferrari Bravo, D.,
Sassi, R., & Impellizzeri, F. M. (2007). Validity of simple field
tests as indicators of match-related physical performance in
top-level professional soccer players. International Journal of
Sports Medicine, 28, 228–235.
Rampinini, E., Sassi, A., Azzalin, A., Castagna, C., Menaspa, P.,
Carlomagno, D., & Impellizzeri, F. M. (2010). Physiological
determinants of Yo-Yo intermittent recovery tests in male soccer
players. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 108,401–409.
Sporis, G., Jukic, I., Milanovic, L., & Vucetic, V. (2010).
Reliability and factorial validity of agility tests for soccer players.
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 24,679–686.
Counter-point number 1: football-specific testing: adding value or
confirming the evidence?
BARRY DRUST
Research Institute for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK
The article by Mendez-Villanueva and Buchheit
provides an interesting prac tical critique of the
use of fitness testing within football. Practitioners
who has worked practically within e lite sport will
recognise the efficacy of their comments as a con-
siderable proportion of “sport science” (not just
the fitness testing) does not seem to clearly and
objectively impact the performance of the athletes.
Such observations are not, however, purely asso-
ciated with the philosophy of practice of any spe-
cific sport scientist. They are, in reality, a direct
response to a variety of factors (e.g., the environ-
ment and the culture of the organisation, the
approach of the coach and players, etc.) that influ-
ence the way that any sport science support pro-
gramme is planned and implemented. As such, any
approach to sport science support, such as the
strategy for fitness testing, need to be viewed in
the context of the specificpurposeoftheactivity.
That is to say that testing programmes may be
influential even if they do not act as anything
more than “evidence providers” for coaches if the
data collected fulfils the requirements of the sup-
port programme.
Mendez-Villanueva and Buchheit’scritiqueofthe
relationships between football-specifictestsandthe
ability of the data to directly inform training pro-
grammes and/or performance potential seems much
more important. While the research related to the
development of specific tests has clearly increased
over the last decade it would seem that the insight
associated with data that these tests provide is still
fundamentally limited. Some of the responsibility for
this situation should be targeted at individual research-
ers as it is a consequence of their design decisions
about the specific research projects that are available
in the area. A more comprehensive explanation prob-
ably relates to the fundamental theoretical and practi-
cal restraints associated with meaningfully analysing
football performance and its components. Such bar-
riers to knowledge are becoming limited as the prac-
tical and methodological barriers to data collection
and analysis are removed. This may result in the
development of a more suitable evidence base upon
which to devise and operationalise testing programmes
that have meaning for a players and teams perfor-
mance as suggested by Mendez-Villanueva and
Buchheit in their concluding comments.
E-mail: B.Drust@ljmu.ac.uk
Point-counter-point 1505
Downloaded by [193.95.44.202] at 05:55 10 September 2013
Counter-point number 2: football-specific testing: adding value or
confirming the evidence?
BRIAN DAWSON
Exercise Physiology and Biochemistry, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia
This short paper eloquently expresses the view that
contemporary fitness testing by sports scientists and
fitness and conditioning coaches in elite team sports
may prima rily be confirming evidence of the phys ical
capacities of players (of which the coach is already
largely aware) rather than discovering or exploring
ways to “value add” to the players and team. The
paper raises the point that perhaps conventional
team sport specific fitness tests like the Yo-Yo and
5–20 m sprint tests, while useful and valid and reli-
able, may not necessarily give much new or addi-
tional information, which might have more specific
uses in the areas of injury rehabilitation and indivi-
dual training prescription. They therefore argue that
further tests such as the maximal sprinting speed
(MSS) and maximal aerobic speed (MAS), which
are not team sport, but capacity specific tests, should
also be performed.
While their arguments are sound and logical, it
can also be argued that the sport scientists and
fitness coaches working in elite team sport have suf-
ficient knowledge and understanding of performance
(in the global sense) to appreciate that (in particular)
technical and tactical factors have just as much (but
probably more) to say about individual player and
team performance. Rather than spending great
amounts of time in analysing the relationships
between physical capacity test scores and perfor-
mance and inven ting more specific fitness tests to
use, perhaps the time could be better spent on devel-
oping more specific skill and decision making drills
to make the pla yers and team better, and any inves-
tigation of the relationship between fitness and per-
formance should be expanded to include technical
and tactical measures, in a multi-factorial analysis.
Being fit to play is vital, but coaches understand very
well that usually technical/tactical differences
between players and teams underscore the result.
At the elite level, there may not be much margin
left in fitness to exploit.
Counter-point number 3: football-specific testing: adding value or
confirming the evidence?
PAUL S. BRADLEY
1
& PETER KRUSTRUP
2,
*
1
Department of Sport and Exercise Sciences, University of Sunderland, UK and
2
Sport and Health Sciences, College of Life
and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
As discussed by Mendez-Villanueva & Buchheit
(2013), modern applied scientists in football typi-
cally incorporate a testing battery at selected stages
of the season to evaluate physical performance and
to individualise and adjust training programmes.
Most if not all approa ch this with the assumption
that the testing modality should be “football-speci-
fic” and demonstrate both experimental evidence
(reproducibility, validity and sensitivity) and
practical application (Cur rell & Jeukendrup, 2008;
Stølen, Chamari, Castagna, & Wisloff, 2005;
Svensson & Drust, 2005). The authors have pro-
vided convincing arguments, but the reader is ulti-
mately presented with an easy dilemma: to place
emphasis on “football-specific” tests that are accom-
panied by not only logic and strong experimental
evidence but unproven concerns regarding applica-
tion or “non-specific” tests that provide questionable
E-mail: brian.dawson@uwa.edu.au
E-mails: paul.s.bradley@sunderland.ac.uk; pkrustrup@i fi.ku.dk
1506 A. Mendez-Villanueva & M. Buchheit
Downloaded by [193.95.44.202] at 05:55 10 September 2013
“hidden” information. There are obviously caveats
associated with each, but we advocate the use of
“football-specific” tests that have undergone scienti-
fic rigour and critiquing by applied scientists. The
authors point out, quite rightly, that providing coa-
ches/players with quality feedback is imperative in
the applied setting, particularly if the goal is to not
only enhance physical performance but also “global”
football ability. Although the intended rec ipients
(coaches/players) may receive new information
using the authors approach (beneficial or not
remains to be seen), they would certainly question
the context it was obtained particularly if the mod-
ality lacks “football-specificity”, which could nullify
its impact (no confidence in feedback).
Regarding “football-specific” sprint testing
applied scientists usually use repeated 20–30 m
tests that incorporate numerous split times that
include the determination of both acceleration,
maximal sprint paramete rs and fatigue resistance
for relative usage (Harley et a l., 20 10) rathe r than
the reductionist perspective of single 5–10 m tests
presented in the article, so we are unsure what
additional insight this provides to the reader.
Notably, the authors advocate the use of the max-
imal aerobic speed (MAS) test (continuous test
without directional changes) for football over and
above the Yo-Yo t ests (i ntermit tent test wit h di rec-
tional changes). This is based on the assertion that
the Yo-Yo test fails to demarcate between aerobic
and anaerobic fitness parameters, despite the suc-
cessful use of sub-maximal (aerobic) and maximal
versions of the Yo-Yo test (aerobic/anaerobic) in
addition to the user been provided with the option
of using two levels of the test that tax the aerobic
and anaerobic systems to different extents as eval-
uated by muscle and blood metabolite analyses
(Bangsbo, Iaia, & Krustrup, 2008; Bradley et al.,
2012; Krustrup et al., 2003, 2006). Thus, MAS
testing seems to be one step forward compared to
simple V
˙
O
2
max testing as it incorporates the run-
ning economy (for continuous moderate to high
speed linear running with running shoes) but it
still appears to be one or two steps backwards in
time and relevance for the football community.
Mendez-Villanueva & Buchheit (2013) also criticise
the practic al recommendations that can be given to
players/coaching staff after the test but from the
literature above, it is clear that feedback can be
provided regarding the type of training needed,
with the specificity reported for effects of aerobic
high-intensity training, anaerobic speed endurance
training and sprint training (e.g., Mohr et al.,
2007), t o optimise physical performance in football
given similarities between the intermittent nature of
the test and the sport. Ultimately, the quality of the
feedback pre sented to coaches/players when
employing “football-specific” batteriesisalsohighly
dependent upon the skill and the c raft of the
applied scientist as opposed t o s imply using “non-
specific” testing modalities to add “something new”
but not necessarily “better” into the system.
Although this debate is in sightful, it does not
answer the key question of whether testing modal-
ities for football need to be able to evaluate and be
prescriptive regardless of their validity to s imply add
value,surelynot!
References
Bangsbo, J., Iaia, F. M., & Krustrup, P. (2008). The Yo–Yo
intermittent recovery test: A useful tool for evaluation of phy-
sical performance in intermittent sports. Sports Medicine, 38,
37–51.
Bradley, P. S., Bendiksen, M., Dellal, A., Mohr, M., Wilkie, A.,
Datson, N., ... Krustrup, P. (2012). The application of the Yo-
Yo intermittent endurance level 2 test to elite female soccer
populations. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in
Sports. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2012.01483.x. [Epub ahead
of print]
Currell, K., & Jeukendrup, A. E. (2008). Validity, reliability and
sensitivity of measures of sporting performance. Sports
Medicine, 38, 297–316.
Harley, J. A., Barnes, C. A., Portas, M., Lovell, R., Barrett, S.,
Paul, D., & Weston, M. (2010). Motion analysis of match-play
in elite U12 to U16 age-group soccer players. Journal of Sports
Science, 28, 1391–1397.
Krustrup, P., Mohr, M., Amstrup, T., Rysgaard, T., Johansen, J.,
Steensberg, A., & Bangsbo, J. (2003). The Yo-Yo intermittent
recovery test: Physiological response, reliability, and validity.
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 35, 697–705.
Krustrup, P., Mohr, M., Nybo, L., Jensen, J. M., Nielsen, J. J., &
Bangsbo, J. (2006). The Yo-Yo IR2 test: Physiological
response, reliability and application to elite soccer. Medicine
& Science in Sports & Exercise, 38, 1666–1673.
Mendez-Villanueva, A., & Buchheit, M. (2013). Football-specific
testing: Adding value or confirming the evidence? Journal of
Sports Sciences. doi:10.1080/02640414.2013.823231.
Mohr, M., Krustrup, P., Nielsen, J. J., Nybo, L., Rasmussen, M.
K., Juel, C., & Bangsbo, J. (2007). Effect of two different
intense training regimens on skeletal muscle ion transport pro-
teins and fatigue development. American Journal of Physiology –
Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology, 292, R1594–
R1602.
Stølen, T., Chamari, K., Castagna, C., & Wisloff, U. (2005).
Physiology of soccer: An update. Sports Medicine, 35, 501–536.
Svensson, M., & Drust, B. (2005). Testing soccer players. Journal
of Sports Science, 23, 601–618.
Point-counter-point 1507
Downloaded by [193.95.44.202] at 05:55 10 September 2013
Counter-point number 4: football-specific testing: adding value or
confirming the evidence?
OLIVER FAUDE
Institute of Exercise and Health Sciences, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
I agree with the authors that fitness testing in football
should go beyond simply providing or confirming
evidence. Testing should additionally support the
individual player to optimise fitness and, in conse-
quence, to improve competitive performance. A
good physical shape of the team may increase the
tactical opportunities of the coach. There is one
point I would like to comment on. The authors state
that sprints over short distances are extremely football-
specific tests. In my view, 5-m sprint tests are appro-
priate to assess acceleration (a general physical ability)
which is relevant in many different sports, including
football. I wonder, whether a clear differentiation is
possible for most tests. The authors state that coaches
in most cases know the fast players in their team.
Thus, 5-m sprint times do not necessarily provide
meaningful information. Similarly, coaches may
know the strongest, most powerful or best endurance
athletes in their team. Therefore, this statement argues
against fitness testing at all (independent of tests being
footb all-specific or more general). To my experience,
there is always danger that coaches fail with their sub-
jective judgement due to intra-individual variations in
physical shape. Moreover, fitness testing is not only an
essential component of sport science service in profes-
sional teams but also in football academies, i.e., in
talent development. In this setting, there is a greater
fluctuation of players and not all players are well-
known. The main aim of fitness testing should be the
long-term assessment of players to detect fitness defi-
cits and developments and to initiate individual train-
ing programs. Thus, fitness testing should be
standardised, objective and (if possible) independent
of the current coach of a team. To my opinion, to date
there is not enough scientificevidencetodefinitely
decide what is preferable: testing general physical abil-
ities or using football-specifictestsoracombinationof
both.
E-mail: Oliver.faude@unibas.ch
1508 A. Mendez-Villanueva & M. Buchheit
Downloaded by [193.95.44.202] at 05:55 10 September 2013
