Movement Demands of Elite Rugby League Players During Australian National Rugby League and European Super League Matches

Abstract

This study compared the movement demands of players competing in matches from the elite Australian and European rugby league competitions.
Global positioning system devices were used to measure 192 performances of forwards, adjustables and outside backs during National Rugby League (NRL; n = 88) and European Super League (SL; n = 104) matches. Total and relative distances covered overall and at low (0 to 3.5 m·s-1), moderate (3.6 to 5 m·s-1) and high (>5 m·s-1) speeds were measured alongside changes in movement variables across the early-, mid- and late-phases of the season.
The relative distance covered in SL matches (95.8 ± 18.6 m·min-1) was significantly greater (P<.05) than NRL matches (90.2 ± 8.3 m·min-1). Relative low speed activity (70.3 ± 4.9 m·min-1 vs. 75.5 ± 18.9 m·min-1) and moderate-speed running (12.5 ± 3.3 m·min-1 vs. 14.2 ± 3.8 m·min-1) was highest (P<.05) in the SL matches and relative high-speed distance was greater (P<.05) during NRL matches (7.8 ± 2.1 m·min-1 vs. 6.1 ± 1.7 m·min-1).
NRL players have better maintenance of high-speed running between the first and second half of matches, and perform less low and moderate-speed activities, indicating that the NRL provides a higher standard of rugby league competition than the SL.

Full text

925
www.IJSPP-Journal.com
ORIGINAL INVESTIGATION
International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 2014, 9, 925-930
http://dx.doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2013-0270
© 2014 Human Kinetics, Inc.
Twist, Edwards, and Highton are with the Dept of Sport and Exercise Sci-
ences, University of Chester, Chester, UK. Waldron is with the School of
Science and Technology, University of New England, Armidale, Australia.
Austin is with the Sydney Swans Australian Football Club, Sydney, Aus-
tralia. Gabbett is with the School of Exercise Science, Australian Catholic
University, Brisbane, Australia. Address author correspondence to Craig
Twist at c.twist@chester.ac.uk.
Movement Demands of Elite Rugby League Players
During Australian National Rugby League
and European Super League Matches
Craig Twist, Jamie Highton, Mark Waldron, Emma Edwards, Damien Austin, and Tim J. Gabbett
Purpose: This study compared the movement demands of players competing in matches from the elite Australian and European
rugby league competitions. Methods: Global positioning system devices were used to measure 192 performances of forwards,
adjustables, and outside backs during National Rugby League (NRL; n = 88) and European Super League (SL; n = 104)
matches. Total and relative distances covered overall and at low (0–3.5 m/s), moderate (3.6–5 m/s), and high (>5 m/s) speeds
were measured alongside changes in movement variables across the early, middle, and late phases of the season. Results: The
relative distance covered in SL matches (95.8 ± 18.6 m/min) was signicantly greater (P < .05) than in NRL matches (90.2 ±
8.3 m/min). Relative low-speed activity (70.3 ± 4.9 m/min vs 75.5 ± 18.9 m/min) and moderate-speed running (12.5 ± 3.3 m
m/min vs 14.2 ± 3.8 m/min) were highest (P < .05) in the SL matches, and relative high-speed distance was greater (P < .05)
during NRL matches (7.8 ± 2.1 m/min vs 6.1 ± 1.7 m/min). Conclusions: NRL players have better maintenance of high-speed
running between the rst and second halves of matches and perform less low- and moderate-speed activity, indicating that the
NRL provides a higher standard of rugby league competition than the SL.
Keywords: match demands, playing intensity, activity proles, time–motion analysis
Rugby league is a contact team sport that is intermittent in
nature, with periods of high- (running, high-speed running, and
sprinting) and low-speed activity (standing, walking, and jogging)
taking place over two 40-minute halves. Players are typically clas-
sied into 3 positional groups (hit-up forwards, outside backs, and
adjustables) based on commonalities in their eld position and play-
ing role.1,2 Hit-up forwards (prop, second row, and loose forward)
cover less distance during a match, have a shorter playing time, and
are involved in more physical collisions, whereas outside backs
(winger, fullback, and center) and adjustables (halfback, stand-off,
and hooker) often travel greater distances during a match, play for
the longest time, and are associated with running in open spaces
and supporting offensive plays.1–4
The match-running activities of team sports depend on the
standard of competition encountered. For example, team-sport
players competing at the highest standard typically perform more
high-speed running and sprinting than players competing at a
subelite standard.5,6 These ndings have been conrmed in rugby
league match play, with professional players demonstrating higher
playing intensities than semiprofessional and junior rugby league
players.7,8 Conversely, lower-ranked teams might perform more
high-speed running to counter deciencies in technical ability
during match play.9
The Australian National Rugby League (NRL) and European
Super League (SL) are the most notable elite competitions, with
the NRL anecdotally regarded as the world’s highest standard of
competition. Only 1 study has compared the playing patterns of NRL
and SL teams using video analysis,10 noting a greater proportion of
time spent by the NRL teams in their defensive third of the pitch
and a higher number of hit-ups in the opponent’s defensive third.
The introduction of global positioning system (GPS) technology
into the rugby league environment has seen several studies exam-
ine the movement and physiological match demands imposed on
players during both NRL3,11,12 and SL2,13 matches. Similar absolute
distances of 3000 to 8000 m have been reported for NRL1,3,12 and
SL2 matches. While some studies report higher relative distances
for NRL players (~106 m/min),14 others have reported similar
values of 85 to 95 m/min in both the NRL11,12 and SL.2 However,
problems in comparing studies using different movement-analysis
technologies14 and the timing of these studies make comparisons
between competitions difcult. To date, no study has made direct
comparisons of the match demands between professional rugby
league players from the Australian and European competitions. A
study of this nature would be useful to elucidate any differences
between the 2 competitions that may explain, at least in part, the
disparate tactical approaches to match play between NRL and
SL teams. Furthermore, given the dominance of the Australian
national team (NRL players) in competition with other European
nations such as England and France, such a study might help inform
coaching practices in Europe. Therefore, this study compared the
movement demands of players competing in matches from the elite
Australian and European rugby league competitions.
Methods
With institutional ethical approval (approval HMS09/1407), data
were collected during the 2011 season from 1 professional team
participating in the Australian NRL and 1 professional team from

926 Twist et al
the European SL. All data were desensitized by a third party before
analysis so that researchers were unable to identify players. Only
data from the leagues’ domestic season were included. Based on
previous studies, and in accordance with normal coaching practice,
players were subcategorized into 3 positional groups of outside
backs, adjustables, and hit-up forwards (referred to as forwards
hereafter).1,2 A total of 192 match performances were recorded,
comprising 104 SL matches and 88 NRL matches. The win percent-
ages of the matches analyzed were 44% and 50%, and the mean
score decits were 10 ± 5 and 9 ± 5 points, for the NRL and SL,
respectively.
Time–motion analysis was undertaken using portable GPS
devices (SPI-Pro; 5Hz, GPSports, Canberra, Australia) and an in-
built triaccelerometer (100 Hz). The reliability and accuracy of these
units have been reported previously.15,16 All players were accus-
tomed to wearing the GPS devices during training and matches.
Each player was pretted with an appropriately sized vest housing
the portable GPS unit between the scapulae. A standard squad
shirt (tightly tted) was worn over the top of the vest. The GPS
device was tted to the vest of the player on entering the eld for
the warm-up. All data were downloaded to a computer using SPI
Ezy v 2.1 (GPSports, Canberra, Australia) and analyzed post hoc
using Team AMS v 2.1 software (GPSports, Canberra, Australia).
Data for the entire match were recorded for outside backs (n
= 72), adjustables (n = 52), and forwards (n = 68) that totaled 192
performances. Changes in movement demands were also analyzed
between the rst and second halves (188 performances), with players
who played for less than 5 minutes of each half removed from the
analysis. In accordance with previous studies in soccer,6 changes
in movement variables across 3 different time phases of the season
were also considered (192 performances), namely, early phase
(NRL n = 29 performances, SL n = 26 performances; 10 matches),
midphase (NRL n = 30 performances, SL n = 32 performances; 9
matches), and late phase (NRL n = 29 performances, SL n = 46
performances; 6 matches). The variables recorded were duration
on the pitch (min), total distance covered (m), relative distance
covered (m/min), and absolute and relative distances covered at low
(0–3.5 m/s), moderate (3.6–5 m/s), and high (>5 m/s) speeds. The
use of these broad speed categories was deemed appropriate based
on the limitations associated with 5-Hz GPS technology.14,15 For
each player, only the time spent actively on the pitch was analyzed.
Statistical Analysis
Data were initially analyzed for violations of normality and homoge-
neity of variances using the Shapiro-Wilk statistic and Levene test,
respectively. Further checks for sphericity were performed using the
Mauchley test. Separate factorial (group [2] × position [3]) analyses
of variance (ANOVAs) were conducted on each of the dependent
variables. In addition, separate mixed-model repeated-measures
ANOVAs (group [2] × time [2]) were used to assess differences in
total distance, low-speed activity, and moderate-speed and high-speed
running between the rst and second halves of matches. Finally,
multivariate ANOVA (group [2] × time [3]) was used to assess dif-
ferences in relative distance, low-speed activity, and moderate- and
high-speed running between early-, middle-, and late-season phases
of the season. Where appropriate, post hoc analyses were conducted
using independent-sample t tests with a Holm-Bonferroni adjustment
to assess for positional differences between the 2 groups. Statistical
signicance was set at P < .05, and data are reported as mean ± SD
unless otherwise stated. Effect sizes (ESs) were calculated as the dif-
ference between the means divided by the pooled standard deviation.
Effect sizes were classied as trivial <0.2, small 0.21–0.6, moderate
0.61–1.2, large 1.21–1.99, and very large >2.0.17
Results
A signicant interaction, revealing trivial to moderate differences
in playing times, was found between positional groups in NRL and
SL matches (F2,186 = 3.82, P = .024; ES = –0.08 to 0.79), with post
hoc analyses revealing that only NRL adjustables had a greater total
playing time than SL adjustables (t = 2.76, P = .008; ES = 0.79).
A signicant moderate difference in the total distance covered was
found between positional groups in NRL and SL matches (F2,186 =
10.47, P < .001; ES = –0.63 to 0.93). Post hoc analysis revealed that
SL forwards covered greater distances than those in NRL matches
(t = 3.28, P = .002; ES = –0.63) but that NRL adjustables covered
greater distances than their SL counterparts (t = 2.55, P = .013;
ES = 0.93). There was a small difference in the relative distances
covered between groups, with lower values in NRL than in SL
matches (F1,186 = 12.76, P < .001; ES = –0.38). In addition, there
were trivial to moderate differences in relative distance covered
between positional groups in NRL and SL matches (F2,186 = 5.29,
P = .006; ES = –1.18 to 0.10), with post hoc analysis indicating a
higher relative distance covered by forwards in SL matches than
in the NRL (t = 4.78, P < .001; ES = –1.18). Relative distance cov-
ered in low-speed activity (F1,186 = 16.16, P < .001; ES = –0.43)
and moderate-speed running (F1,186 = 16.22, P < .001; ES = –0.48)
was highest in the SL matches, while relative high-speed running
distance was greater during NRL matches (F1,186 = 15.80, P <
.001; ES = 0.54). Low-speed activity showed trivial to moderate
differences between positions in the NRL and SL (F2,186 = 5.68,
P = .004; ES = –1.06 to 0.15), although moderate-speed running
was not signicantly different (F2,186 = 1.69, P = .187; ES = –0.95
to –0.28). Trivial to moderate positional differences in high-speed
running were observed between NRL and SL matches (F2,182 =
5.87, P = .003; ES = –0.07–1.2). Post hoc analysis revealed that
forwards performed more low-speed activity in the SL (t = –4.74,
P < .001; ES = –1.06), while adjustables (t = 5.01, P < .001; ES =
1.16) and outside backs (t = 2.69, P = .010; ES = 0.69) performed
more high-speed running in NRL matches (Table 1).
There was no main effect, indicating that the average playing
time was not different between the rst (NRL 37.0 ± 8.2 min, SL
36.4 ± 12.2 min) and second halves (NRL 37.6 ± 10.5 min, SL 36.4
± 10.9 min) of matches (F1,186 = 1.37, P = .243; ES = 0.04–0.14),
nor were these values different between groups (F1,186 = 0.141, P =
.708; ES = -0.06). A main effect indicated relative distance reduced
from the rst to the second half (F1,186 = 8.08, P = .005), but reduc-
tions were similar between NRL (92.6 ± 9.4 m/min cf 87.4 ± 8.8
m/min, respectively; ES = 0.58) and SL (102.6 ± 31.4 m/min cf
96.7 ± 27.2 m/min, respectively; ES = 0.18) matches (F1,182 = 0.03,
P = .863). A main effect revealed reductions in low-speed activity
between halves (F1,186 = 4.77, P = .030), although changes for NRL
(72.2 ± 5.8 cf 68.3 ± 5.4 m/min; ES = 0.69) and SL (80.2 ± 26.5 cf
77.0 ± 22.6 m/min; ES = 0.11) matches were not different (F1,186
= 0.051, P = .822). Moderate-speed running was reduced from the
rst to the second half (F1,186 = 4.87, P = .028) but was not differ-
ent between NRL (12.8 ± 3.7 cf. 12.2 ± 3.7 m/min; ES = 0.16) and
SL (15.2 ± 5.2 cf. 14.3 ± 5.0 m/min; ES = 0.16) matches (F1,186 =
0.18, P = .674). A main effect revealed reductions in high-speed
running from the rst to the second half (F1,186 = 24.26, P < .001),
with signicant changes in SL (7.3 ± 3.1 cf 5.4 ± 2.4 m/min; ES =
0.68) but not NRL (7.5 ± 3.3 cf 6.8 ± 2.5 m/min; ES = 0.25) matches
(F1,186 = 4.46, P = .036; Figure 1).

927
Table 1 Match Characteristics for National Rugby League (NRL) and Super League (SL) Forwards, Adjustables, Outside Backs, and All Players
National Rugby League Super League
Forwards
(n = 29)
Adjustables
(n = 29)
Outside backs
(n = 30)
All
(n = 88)
Forwards
(n = 39)
Adjustables
(n = 23)
Outside backs
(n = 42)
All
(n = 104)
Time (min) 56.7 ± 16.4 82.8 ± 8.9† 85.8 ± 3.9 75.2 ± 17.0 57.9 ± 15.8 69.7 ± 23.4 83.9 ± 12.9 70.5 ± 21.0
Total distance (m) 4948 ± 1370† 7973 ± 1160† 7381 ± 518 6775 ± 1686 5733 ± 1158 6766 ± 1495 7133 ± 1204 6526 ± 1396
Relative distance (m/min) 88.0 ± 7.8† 96.2 ± 7.5 86.5 ± 6.3 90.2 ± 8.3* 101.7 ± 14.0 104.4 ± 27.2 85.6 ± 10.7 95.8 ± 18.6
Low-speed activity (m/min) 70.6 ± 5.1† 73.2 ± 4.5 67.2 ± 3.2 70.3 ± 4.9* 81.1 ± 12.4 82.8 ± 23.4 66.3 ± 7.3 75.5 ± 15.9
Moderate-speed running (m/min) 11.8 ± 3.6 14.6 ± 3.2 11.0 ± 1.9 12.5 ± 3.3* 15.1 ± 3.4 15.7 ± 4.5 12.7 ± 3.4 14.2 ± 3.8
High-speed running (m/min) 5.5 ± 2.0 8.2 ± 2.2† 7.8 ± 2.1† 7.2 ± 2.4* 5.6 ± 1.9 5.9 ± 1.7 6.6 ± 1.5 6.1 ± 1.7
Note: Low-speed activity = 0–3.5 m/s, moderate-speed running = 3.6–5.0 m/s, and high-speed running = >5.0 m/s.
*Signicant difference between NRL and SL (P < .05). †Signicant difference between NRL and SL matches for same positional group (P < .05).

928 Twist et al
higher relative distance between groups (F1,186 = 5.29, P = .023;
ES = –0.38). Low-speed activity remained unchanged between the
early- (NRL 70.7 ± 4.4 m/min, SL 72.4 ± 14.1 m/min), middle-
(NRL 70.5 ± 5.4 m/min, SL 75.2 ± 10.8 m/min), and late-season
phases (NRL 69.6 ± 5.1 m/min, SL 77.4 ± 19.4 m/min; F2,186 =
.415, P = .661; ES = –0.29 to 0.23). However, a main effect for
group revealed a higher low-speed activity in SL players (F1,184 =
6.94, P = .009; ES = –0. 43). Moderate-speed running remained
unchanged between the early- (NRL 13.1 ± 3.4 m/min, SL 13.5
± 4.1 m/min), middle- (NRL 13.0 ± 3.7 m/min, SL 14.4 ± 3.1 m/
min), and late-season phases (NRL 11.3 ± 2.6 m/min, SL 14.6 ±
4.1 m/min; F2,186 = .746, P = .475; ES = –0.26 to 062). Again, a
main effect for group revealed higher moderate-speed running
in SL players (F1,186 = 10.14, P = .002; ES = –0.49). High-speed
running remained consistent across the early- (NRL 7.2 ± 2.3 m/
min, SL 6.0 ± 1.6 m/min), middle- (NRL 7.6 ± 2.5 m/min, SL 5.9
± 1.6 m/min), and late-season phases (NRL 6.7 ± 2.4 m/min, SL
6.2 ± 1.9 m/min; F1,186 = 0.479, P = .620; ES = –0.21 to 0.42) and
was higher in NRL players than in SL players (F1,182 = 13.34, P <
.001; ES = 0.53).
Discussion
This is the rst study to directly compare the match demands of elite
rugby league teams from the Australian and European competitions.
Our study compared 192 match performances from the same season
in an attempt to ascertain if the demands differed between the NRL
and SL competitions. The total and relative distance covered during
each of the respective competitions were similar to those reported
previously in NRL1,3,12 and SL2 matches. However, we observed that
values for forwards and adjustables in this study were slightly higher
than values reported for the same positional groups by Waldron et
al.2 These small differences (~6 m/min) are potentially explained
by the larger number of performances measured in the current study
and match-to-match variability in activity proles of team sport.18,19
Collectively, these ndings suggest that our data are representative
of the movement demands imposed on players during Australian
NRL and European SL competitions.
This study revealed that adjustables in the NRL matches had
more game time and covered greater absolute distances per match
than the same positional group in the SL matches. This was in con-
trast to forwards and outside backs, whose game time in the NRL and
SL matches was similar. While small differences in total absolute
and relative match intensity were apparent between groups, it would
appear that players in the NRL and SL matches achieve this in a
different manner. Although SL players spend a greater proportion
of match play in low-speed activity and moderate-speed running,
our observations conrm a superior relative high-speed running in
the NRL than the SL matches. Moreover, specic positional groups
were responsible for the discrepancies between competitions, with
NRL adjustables and outside backs performing more high-speed
running than their SL counterparts and SL forwards performing
more low-speed activity than NRL forwards. The amount of high-
speed running has been used to differentiate between standards of
competition in team sports,6–8 with top-class teams performing more
high-speed running than moderate-standard teams. Accordingly,
ndings in this study provide evidence to support the anecdotal
claims that the activity proles of the NRL differ from those of
the SL. Our ndings also demonstrate that the greater volume
of high-speed running in the NRL can be attributed to positional
groups that predominantly run in open spaces and support offensive
plays.1,4
Figure 1 — Changes in (A) relative distance, (B) low-speed activity, (C)
moderate-speed running, and (D) high-speed running between the rst and
second halves of National Rugby League (NRL; black) and Super League
(SL; light gray) matches. *Signicant difference between rst and second
halves. #Signicant difference between NRL and SL.
Relative distance covered was not different across the early-
(NRL 91.4 ± 8.0 m/min, SL 91.9 ± 18.0 m/min), mid- (NRL 91.5
± 9.0 m/min, SL 95.6 ± 13.3 m/min), and late-season phases (NRL
87.6 ± 7.6 m/min, SL 98.2 ± 21.9 m/min; F2,186 = 0.246, P = .782;
ES = –0.01 to 0.48). However, a main effect for group revealed a

Australian and European Rugby League Match Demands 929
While the inuence of match score, possession, and tactical
decisions cannot be ignored, reductions in high-speed running
toward the end of a rugby league match are known to be indicative of
fatigue.13,20,21 While both groups of players performed similar relative
amounts of high-speed running in the rst half, second-half high-
speed running was ~9% and ~27% lower for NRL and SL matches,
respectively. The small reduction in second-half high-speed running
in NRL players accounts for the greater total volume of higher-
speed running observed in the Australian matches. These ndings
also suggest that, across the course of match play, NRL matches
were played at consistently higher intensities than SL matches.
Differences in physical capacity are known to inuence high-speed
running performance during team sports,22,23 which might explain
the discrepancies in physical demands observed between NRL and
SL matches. In particular, greater prolonged high-speed-running
capacity of NRL adjustables and outside backs would have enabled
more high-speed running by these players during a game.22 Tactical
strategies implemented by Australian coaches might also enable the
maintenance of high-speed running during NRL matches. For exam-
ple, the introduction of second-half interchange players in soccer
increases the overall distance covered in high-speed running.6 While
the total match time of the most typically interchanged players (ie,
forwards) was not different between NRL and SL, a more effective
use of interchanges to replace fatiguing players could have enabled
the smaller reduction in second-half high-speed running observed
in NRL matches. Such observations might also be inuenced by the
pacing strategies adopted by players during matches. Indeed, our
ndings reafrm those of Waldron et al,12 who reported that inter-
change players in the European SL typically adopt higher intensities
in their rst exercise bout, followed by a lower, maintainable intensity
in the second. Players in the NRL might therefore be encouraged to
adopt an even pacing strategy that enables only small reductions in
high-speed running in the second half of a match.
The relative distance, low-speed activity, and moderate- and
high-speed running were not different across the early-, middle-, and
late-season phases for both NRL and SL matches. These data differ
from those reported in soccer, where total distance and high-speed
running increase toward the end of the season.6,24 These data also
suggest that SL matches involve players covering greater relative
distances but that this is achieved through more low-speed activity.
Our ndings therefore support anecdotal claims that matches in the
SL competition are slower than those of the NRL.
Practical Applications
These ndings enable coaches to better understand the activity
proles of elite rugby league teams that allow players to perform
at the highest standard. While total relative distance provides an
indicator of overall match demand, practitioners should consider
the way players achieve that distance. Coaches should also develop
players’ capacity to maintain high-speed running in the second
halves of matches and resist fatigue that might have a negative
outcome in terms of running performance. The ability to maintain
more high-speed running in a match appears to be an important
characteristic of teams playing in a better standard of competition.
Coaches should also consider the roles of individual players and
how they contribute to the maintenance of overall match intensity.
Conclusions
In the rst study to directly compare the movement demands of
an NRL and SL team during the same season, we have provided
evidence to substantiate the anecdotal claims that the NRL provides
a higher standard of rugby league competition than the SL. This is
based on the observations that in NRL players, high-speed running
is better preserved between the rst and second halves of matches
and that SL matches comprise more low-speed activity throughout
the season. NRL adjustables and outside backs performed more
high-speed running than their SL counterparts. This suggests that
in the NRL, greater emphasis is placed on the involvement of these
positions and their roles during matches.
References
1. King T, Jenkins D, Gabbett TJ. A time–motion analysis of professional
rugby league match-play. J Sports Sci. 2009;27:213–219. PubMed
doi:10.1080/02640410802538168
2. Waldron M, Twist C, Highton J, et al. Movement and physiological
match demands of elite rugby league using portable global positioning
systems. J Sports Sci. 2011;29:1223–1230. PubMed doi:10.1080/02
640414.2011.587445
3. McLellan PM, Lovell DI, Gass GC. Creatine kinase and endocrine
responses of elite players pre, during, and post rugby league match
play. J Strength Cond Res. 2010;24:2908–2919.
4. Gabbett TJ, King T, Jenkins D. Applied physiology of rugby league.
Sports Med. 2008;38:119–138. PubMed doi:10.2165/00007256-
200838020-00003
5. Higham DG, Pyne DB, Anson JM, et al. Movement patterns in
rugby sevens: effects of tournament level, fatigue and substitute
players. J Sci Med Sport. 2012;15:277–282. PubMed doi:10.1016/j.
jsams.2011.11.256
6. Mohr M, Krustrup P, Bangsbo J. Match performance of high-standard
soccer players with special reference to development of fatigue. J Sports
Sci. 2003;21:519–528. PubMed doi:10.1080/0264041031000071182
7. Gabbett TJ. Inuence of playing standard on the physical demands
of junior rugby league tournament match-play. J Sci Med Sport.
2014;17(2):212–217. PubMed doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2013.03.013
8. McLellan CP, Lovell DI. Performance analysis of professional, semi-
professional and junior elite rugby league match-play using global
positioning systems. J Strength Cond Res. 2013; in press. PubMed
9. Di Salvo V, Gregson W, Atkinson G, et al. Analysis of high intensity
activity in Premier League soccer. Int J Sports Med. 2009;30:205–212.
PubMed doi:10.1055/s-0028-1105950
10. Eaves S, Broad G. A comparative analysis of professional rugby league
football playing patterns in Australia and the United Kingdom. Int J
Perform Anal Sport. 2007;7:54–66.
11. Austin DJ, Kelly SJ. Professional rugby league positional match-
play analysis through the use of a global positioning system. J
Strength Cond Res. 2014;28(1):187–193. PubMed doi:10.1519/
JSC.0b013e318295d324
12. Gabbett TJ, Jenkins DG, Abernethy B. Physical demands of pro-
fessional rugby league training and competition using microtech-
nology. J Sci Med Sport. 2012;15:80–86. PubMed doi:10.1016/j.
jsams.2011.07.004
13. Waldron M, Highton J, Daniels M, Twist C. Preliminary evidence of
transient fatigue and pacing during interchanges in rugby league. Int
J Sports Physiol Perform. 2013;8:157–164. PubMed
14. Randers MB, Mujika I, Hewitt A, et al. Application of four different
football match analysis systems: a comparative study. J Sports Sci.
2010;28:171–182. PubMed doi:10.1080/02640410903428525
15. Waldron M, Worsfold P, Twist C, et al. Concurrent validity and test
re-test reliability of a global positioning system (GPS) and timing
gates to assess sprint performance. J Sports Sci. 2011;29:1613–1619.
PubMed doi:10.1080/02640414.2011.608703

930 Twist et al
16. Petersen C, Pyne D, Portus M, et al. Validity and reliability of GPS
units to monitor cricket-specic movement patterns. Int J Sports
Physiol Perform. 2009;4:381–393. PubMed
17. Hopkins WG. Spreadsheets for analysis of controlled trials, with
adjustment for a subject characteristic. SportScience. 2006;10:46–50.
18. Gregson W, Drust B, Atkinson G, et al. Match-to-match variability
of high-speed activities in Premier League soccer. Int J Sports Med.
2010;31:237–242. PubMed doi:10.1055/s-0030-1247546
19. Kempton T, Sirotic AC, Coutts AJ. Between match variation in profes-
sional rugby league competition. J Sci Med Sport. 2014;17(4):404–
407. PubMed doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2013.05.006.
20. Sirotic AC, Coutts AJ, Knowles H, et al. A comparison of match demands
between elite and semi-elite rugby league competition. J Sports Sci.
2009;27:203–211. PubMed doi:10.1080/02640410802520802
21. Sykes D, Twist C, Nicholas C, et al. Changes in locomotive rates during
senior elite rugby league matches. J Sports Sci. 2011;29:1263–1271.
PubMed doi:10.1080/02640414.2011.582507
22. Gabbett TJ, Stein JG, Kemp JG, et al. Relationship between tests
of physical qualities and physical match performance in elite rugby
league players. J Strength Cond Res. 2013;27:1539–1545. PubMed
doi:10.1519/JSC.0b013e318274f236
23. Krustrup P, Mohr M, Ellingsgaard H, et al. Physical demands during
an elite female soccer game: importance of training status. Med
Sci Sports Exerc. 2005;37:1242–1248. PubMed doi:10.1249/01.
mss.0000170062.73981.94
24. Rampinini E, Coutts AJ, Castagna C, et al. Variation in top level soccer
match performance. Int J Sports Med. 2007;28:1018–1024. PubMed
doi:10.1055/s-2007-965158