International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport
2011, 11, 228-239.
Differences in Situational and Morphological Parameters between Male
Soccer and Futsal - A Comparative Study
Mario Jovanovic1, Goran Sporis1 and Zoran Milanovic2
1
2
Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Nis, Nis, Serbia
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine similarity and differences in
morphological and situational parameters between futsal and soccer. The
research was conducted on a sample of 82 subjects: 40 male futsal players
and 42 male soccer players. In addition to height and body mass eight other
anthropometric measures were presented. Situational parameters were
represented by nine variables. Effect size of variables ranged from 0.001 to
0.062. Statistically significant difference was not determined among futsal
and soccer players in the parameters of morphological characteristics. Futsal
and soccer players have showed significant differences in the parameters of
the number of gained possessions of the ball and number of runs with the ball
at the level of significance p< 0.01. The other situational efficiency variables
have shown no significant difference between these two types of team sports.
The results of this study have shown that the futsal and soccer players differ
only in two situational parameters. The difference in morphological variables
was not found due to the fact that futsal players were mainly ex-soccer
players. This finding suggests that futsal needs more specialized approach
when starting in this sport.
Key words: anthropometry, focus system, comparison, team sport, indoor
soccer
1. Introduction
When we talk about soccer and futsal we can say that these are the two sports that are at
first glance very similar in performance characteristics. The main common characteristic is
that these are team sports with intermittent high-intensity activities (Barbero-Alvarez, Soto,
Barbero-Alvarez, & Granda-Vera, 2008; Bangsbo, Norregaarg, & Thorso, 1991; Ben
Abdelkrim, El Fazza, & El Ati, 2007) where the lower extremities play the key role for
controlling the ball. Futsal is known as an indoor version of soccer, demanding sport with
growing specificities in morphological and motor demands (Barbero-Alvarez et al., 2008;
Barbero-Alvarez, D'Ottavio, Granda-Vera, & Castagna, 2009). Such specificities in
morphological and motor demands could be seen as the reason for the separation of futsal
228
and its progressive development which would lead to earlier selection of players with
predispositions to play futsal.
In order to be able to analyze and register the soccer game it is necessary to have an
objective measurement method that is able to record every move that player makes with the
ball (Hartmann, Holzer, & Beetz, 2003). Argilage and Jonsson (2003) stated in their study
that conventional soccer analysis mainly focused on elementary statistics provides
information on the frequency and field distribution of players' passing, shots on goal and
defensive systems. The results obtained by these authors have shown that the attempts to
identify actual events during the game, especially in competitive conditions, were
successfully performed in soccer while it was not the case in futsal. The data such as
number of attacks, areas of field in which the attacks take place, number of passes per unit
of game and the number of shots on goal, are the basis for the programming of training and
preparation of players (Bishovets, Gadajev, & Godik, 1993). The collected data in this way
helps in finding the answer to many problems. Jerkovic and Barisic (1997) found a
significant correlation (ICC = 0.73) among unsuccessful passing, receiving the ball, gained
ball possessions and conceded goals. Miljkovic and Barisic (2002), analyzing the soccer
match between Brazil and Scotland, concluded that it had different styles of attacking
which represents two different schools of soccer.
Support analyzes of the game with computer combines image processing, visual elements
and multimedia resources. Recent development of technology has led to a fully digital
solution to the analytical composition of the game. It is in players’ interest to raise the
practice to a higher level by detailed analysis of situational behavior of their own or the
opposing team.
Intensity during the futsal match was almost 90% of the maximum heart rate (BarbaroAlvarez et al., 2008) while in soccer is lower and ranges from 80 to 90% of maximum heart
rate (Reilly, 1994). In futsal, running in high intensity mode is represented by 13.7% while
sprint occupies about 8.9% during the match (Barbaro-Alvarez et al., 2008) in contrast to
soccer where this kind of movement occupies about 11% (Baros et al., 2007; Reilly,
Bangsbo, & Franks, 2000). Doğramaci and Watsford (2006) have pointed out that futsal
players spend 26% during the match in high-intensity level, which is a direct consequence
of futsal rules that offer the possibility of more frequent changes than soccer.
The reduced dimensions of the field in Futsal affects the constant marking of opposing
players and a much higher level of pressing play and situations 1vs1 (Vaeyens, Lenoir,
Williams, & Philippaerts, 2007). In contrast to the dimensions of the field, which is
obviously different between futsal (38-42 x 18-25 m) and soccer (100-110 x 64-75 m),
match duration was nearly equal. Futsal consists of two halves of 20 minutes while in
soccer one half last 45 minutes. However, the futsal rules allow stops during the match so
that the total duration of the futsal match is about 70-80 minutes (Barbero-Alvarez et al.,
2008) which is similar to the duration of a soccer match (90 minutes). Compared to soccer
technical profile, futsal players are closely associated with a lower volume of the ball in
futsal, forcing the players to respond technically more quickly and accurately while
manipulating the ball (Burns, 2003; Goncalves, 1998).
229
The important question that could be drawn from existing differences concerns the
difference in morphological and especially in the situational parameters between soccer and
futsal players. In the available literature several researches exist on the morphological
differences among soccer players (Da Silva, Kaissa, & Gomes, 1999; Da Silva, Osieck,
Arruda, Moura, & De Campos, 2001; Gallo, Ortega, Batista, & Liotta, 2002; Guerra,
Chaves, Tirapegui, & Barros, 2002). The majority of the researches gave only the
parameters of body height, body weight and fat percentage (Arnason et al., 2004; Aziz &
Chin, 2000; Bunc & Psotta, 2001; Casajus, 2001). Rienzi, Drust, Reilly, Carter, and Martin
(2000) indicate the importance of anthropometric parameters as a factor of success in the
sport. To our knowledge there are no studies that analyze the similarities and differences in
morphological and situational parameters between futsal and soccer. Therefore the aim of
this study was to determine the similarities and differences of morphological and situational
parameters between futsal and soccer.
2. Methods
2.1. Subjects
The research was conducted on a sample of 82 subjects divided in two groups: 40 futsal
players (body mass = 70.39 ± 5.33 kg, body height = 176.26 ± 6.85 cm) and 42 soccer
players (body mass = 70.86 ± 5.65 kg, body height = 175.42 ± 5.95 cm). Soccer and futsal
players in this research were taken from the first Croatian football and futsal league.
Criteria for selection of players was that they have played at least 80% matches of the
season with time spent in the game of soccer for 75 minutes and in futsal for more than 15
minutes. All players were fully informed and they signed a consent form. The study
protocol was held for every subject. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of
the Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Zagreb. Subjects were admitted in the study if
they had a minimum training age of 3 years, engaged in strenuous training at least 10 h per
week and were currently active in competition.
2.2. Procedure
Morphological parameters were measured according to the instructions of the International
Biological Program–IBP. All anthropometric variables were measured with a GPM
anthropometer (Siber & Hegner, Zurich, Switzerland) to the nearest 0.1 cm. For the
estimation of situational parameters the Focus X3 system was used (Elite Sport Analysis,
United Kingdom).
Anthropometric variables were: Body height (BH), body mass (BM), leg length (DN) foot
length (DP), knee diameter (DIK) ankle diameter (DISK), thigh circumference (ON), calf
circumference (OP), thigh skinfold (KNN), calf skinfold (KNP).
Situational variables were: Number of passes to a teammate (BRD), number of received
balls from teammate (BRP), number of gain possessions of the ball (BOL), number of runs
with the ball (BRV), number of dribbling moves (BRDR), number of shots on a goal
230
(BRU), number of actions taken with the foot (BRAN), number of actions taken with the
head (BRAG), number of actions taken with the body (BRAT). Situational parameters are
obtained by analyzing all the games of the first period of Championship 2009/2010 as in
futsal so in soccer and the average value per game for each player was interpreted.
2.3. Data analysis
The statistical Package for Social Sciences SPSS (v18.0, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL) was used
for the statistical analysis. Descriptive statistics were calculated for all experimental data.
Kolmogorov-Smirnov test was used to test if data were normally distributed. Statistical
power was calculated using G-power software. Effect sizes (ES) were calculated by
Cohen’s suggested method (Cohen, 1988) for the magnitude of treatment effects within
groups. Reliability of data was presented using Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient for both
groups. The significance of differences between soccer and futsal players was determined
by one-way univariate analysis of variance (ANOVA). We used the Bonferroni correction
for the level of significance, so the level was p < 0.0026. Pearson’s correlation coefficients
were used to present relationship between situational and anthropometric variables of futsal
and soccer.
3. Results
The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test has shown that data was normally distributed. Statistical
power was 0.95. The values of body height were 0.48% lower in soccer players than in
futsal players with a small effect size (ES = 0.004). In contrast, body weight was higher in
soccer players for 0.67% (ES = 0.001). The only anthropometric variable, in which the
effect size was medium, was DP (ES = 0.062). Other variables had small effect size ranging
from 0.001 to 0.033. Reliability expressed by Cronbach’s Alpha of futsal anthropometric
and situation variables were 0.76 and 0.79, while soccer showed 0.70 and 0.83. Percentage
difference in the average values of morphological variables between soccer and futsal
players were in the range of 0.48% (BH) to 6.85% (KNP). Statistically significant
difference was not determined between futsal and soccer players (Table 1) in the
parameters of morphological characteristics.
In contrast to the morphological characteristics, the largest percentage difference was found
in BOL and BVL variables concerning the parameters of situational efficiency and it
counted 114% (Table 2) with a very large effect size for both variables (ES = 0.217). The
medium effect size was present in a number of actions taken with the foot (ES = 0.066)
with 20% of the difference between soccer and futsal players. The effect size for other
variables was small and the values ranged from 0.000 to 0.023. Futsal and soccer players
have showed significant differences in the parameters of the number of gained possessions
of the ball and number of runs with the ball at the level of significance p < 0.001 (Table 2).
The other situational efficiency variables had no significant difference between these two
types of team sports.
231
Relationships between situational and anthropometric variables indicate that only in soccer
there is significant correlation between number of action taken with foot and calf
circumference (Table 3 and 4).
232
Table 1. Basic descriptive parameters and ANOVA results of anthropometry variables.
Mean±SD
ANOVA
F
Sig.
Futsal
Soccer
Total
%
ES
N=40
N=42
N=82
.352
.555
BH (cm)
176.26±6.85
175.42±5.95
175.83±6.35
0,48
0.004
.154
.696
BM (kg)
70.39±5.32
70.86±5.65
70.64±5.47
-0,67
0.001
2.698
.104
DN (cm)
76.88±3.95
75.61±2.97
76.23±3.52
1,65
0.033
5.332
.024
DP (cm)
26.03±1.18
25.47±1.05
25.74±1.14
2,15
0.062
2.743
.102
DIK (cm)
9.68±0.47
9.85±0.45
9.76±0.46
-1,76
0.033
.353
.554
DISK (cm)
7.60±0.41
7.65±0.34
7.62±0.38
-0,66
0.004
.486
.488
ON (cm)
55.28±3.28
54.85±2.14
55.06±2.75
0,78
0.006
.653
.421
OP (cm)
36.19±1.97
36.51±1.57
36.35±1.77
-0,88
0.008
.549
.461
KNN (mm)
9.79±3.87
10.36±3.10
10.08±3.48
-5,82
0.006
1.293
.259
KNP (mm)
6.28±1.97
6.71±1.45
6.50±1.73
-6,85
0.016
Body height (BH), body mass (BM), leg length (DN) foot length (DP), knee diameter (DIK) ankle diameter (DISK), thigh
circumference (ON), calf circumference (OP), thigh skinfold (KNN), calf skinfold (KNP), ES - effect size, % - percentage difference
between group
233
Table 2. Basic descriptive parameters and ANOVA results of situation variables.
ANOVA
Mean±SD
Futsal
N=40
Soccer
N=42
Total
N=82
%
ES
F
Sig.
1.246
.268
BRD
356.20±198.72 306.61±203.23 330.80±201.35
13,92
0.015
1.246
.268
BRP
111.31±62.10
95.82±63.51
103.37±62.93
13,92
0.015
22.134
.000
BOL
76.41±42.63
163.88±109.94
121.21±94.49
-114,47
0.217
22.134
.000
BRV
29.85±16.65
64.01±42.95
47.35±36.91
-114,44
0.217
1.246
.268
BRDR
125.07±69.77
107.66±71.36
116.15±70.70
13,92
0.015
1.892
.173
BRU
22.35±6.89
24.57±7.63
23.48±7.32
-9,93
0.023
5.663
.020
BRAN
16.35±6.89
13.06±5.61
14.67±6.45
20,12
0.066
.022
.883
BRAG
3.55±5.20
3.38±5.13
3.46±5.13
4,79
0.000
1.259
.265
BRAT
1.29±3.49
.54±2.48
.91±3.02
58,14
0.015
Number of passes to a teammate (BRD), number of received balls from teammate (BRP), number of gain possessions of the ball
(BOL), number of runs with the ball (BRV), number of dribbling moves (BRDR), number of shots on a goal (BRU), number of
actions taken with the foot (BRAN), number of actions taken with the head (BRAG), number of actions taken with the body (BRAT),
ES - effect size, % - percentage difference between group, statistical significance p<0.01.
234
Table 3. Correlations between situational and anthropometric variables in futsal.
BH
BM
DN
DP
DIK
DISC
BRD
-.047
-.086
-.024
-.078
.015
-.328
BWP
-.047
-.086
-.024
-.078
.015
-.328
BOL
-.047
-.086
-.024
-.078
.015
-.328
BRV
-.047
-.086
-.024
-.078
.015
-.328
BRDR
-.047
-.086
-.024
-.078
.015
-.328
PRG
-.047
-.086
-.024
-.078
.015
-.328
BRAN
-.047
-.086
-.024
-.078
.015
-.328
BRAG
-.056
.124
-.045
-.016
.131
-.189
BRAT
-.190
-.020
-.172
-.190
-.012
-.352
Table 4. Correlations between situational and anthropometric variables in soccer.
BH
BM
DN
DP
DIK
DISC
BRD
-.035
-.085
.004
.126
-.024
.056
BWP
-.035
-.085
.004
.126
-.024
.056
BOL
.136
-.030
.140
.277
.115
.118
BRV
.136
-.030
.140
.277
.115
.118
BRDR
-.035
-.085
.004
.126
-.024
.056
PRG
.037
-.079
.057
.188
.030
.084
BRAN
-.093
-.135
-.048
.041
-.068
.033
BRAG
.101
-.109
.092
.091
-.234
-.286
BRAT
.213
.012
.080
.121
.057
-.214
*-Statistical significance p=0.045
235
OP
.125
.125
.125
.125
.125
.125
.125
.329
.278
ON
.082
.082
.082
.082
.082
.082
.082
.255
.201
KNN
-.004
-.004
-.004
-.004
-.004
-.004
-.004
.103
.090
KNP
-.090
-.090
-.090
-.090
-.090
-.090
-.090
.013
.022
OP
-.203
-.203
-.132
-.132
-.203
-.172
-.311*
.047
.083
ON
-.012
-.012
.095
.095
-.012
.033
-.050
-.211
-.211
KNN
-.078
-.078
-.049
-.049
-.078
-.069
-.008
-.159
-.139
KNP
-.167
-.167
-.178
-.178
-.167
-.177
-.097
-.097
-.137
4. Discussion and Conclusion
The average values of players’ body height and body mass are similar or slightly higher
than the values of the national team players’ of Singapore and the first League players’ of
Iceland and Hong Kong (Arnason et al., 2004, Aziz, Chin, & Тeh, 2000; Chin, So, Yuan,
Li, & Wong, 1994). Body height of futsal players is similar to the one found in the study
conducted among Spanish professional futsal players. The study has also shown that
Spanish players were slightly heavier (76.9 kg) (Gorostiaga et al., 2009).
With the analysis of morphological variables, it can be stated that there is great similarity
between futsal and soccer players. This similarity is reflected in all analyzed dimensions of
body. The results of this study partially confirm the conclusion of Gorostiga et al. (2009)
who have found that between Spanish futsal and soccer players there were no statistically
significant differences in height, weight and fat-free body mass. The only statistically
significant difference found in that research was in the thickness of subcutaneous fat,
contrary to the results of this research.
The morphological characteristics are an important factor in the selection of players of team
sports (Rienzi, Drust, Reilly, Carter, & Martin, 2000) but in Croatia there is still no
orientation selection from the earliest period to the futsal but only to soccer, where later,
they are directed to futsal. Therefore, the similarity of soccer and futsal players in the
morphological parameters is seen as direct consequence of a single base in the selection of
players in the earliest period.
Tactical, technical dimensionality of futsal show a tendency to create its own identity
through specialization and focus (Barbero-Alvarez et al., 2008; Castagna, D'Ottavio,
Granda-Vera, & Barbero-Alvarez, 2008) apart from soccer. The importance has been given
to this idea by using of motion analysis, which showed that the futsal players were closer to
basketball and handball players than soccer players in the parameters of total distance
covered and distance covered in different intensity (Castagna et al., 2008). In contrast to
that, the results of this study have shown that the futsal and soccer players differ only in the
number of gained ball possessions and in the number of runs with the ball while the other
parameters showed no statistically significant difference. This difference could be
explained by the fact that the ball in Futsal is smaller compared to soccer and these two
situational-technical parameters are directly dependent on the size of the ball. The BRV is
also affected by the size of the field so the bigger field in soccer gives a greater possibility
of keeping the ball in contrast to futsal which is mainly represented by the game situations
1 vs. 1 (Vaeyens et al., 2007). Other examined variables have also included possession of
the ball but for their demands the technical training of players is crucial and not the volume
of the ball.
The similarity in the frequency of the main technical sessions during small-sided games of
soccer have shown that the size of the field was not the main determinant in the number of
actions (Kelly & Drust, 2009) as it has been confirmed by our investigation, where there
was no difference between the number of actions played with the head, body and foot,
236
although the dimensions of the court were different. Smaller field in futsal could affect the
total number of shots on the goal as confirmed by Kelly and Drust (2009) research that
recommends to coaches the reduction of the field in order to increase the number of shots
on goal. Such fact does not support the results gained in this research.
Relationship between situational and morphological parameters show that there are no
significant correlation in futsal, while in soccer there is negative impact of calf
circumference and the number of actions taken with foot. Although significant (r=-0.311
with p=0.045), authors found no practical significant implication that could be interpreted
with sufficient scientific evidence.
The results have shown that the futsal and soccer, as the team sports, are very similar in
morphological characteristics with some differences in situational parameters that depend
primarily on the volume of the ball. The results obtained in this study could be explained by
the fact that in Croatia still doesn’t exist a school in which the novice players would start
with futsal training from the beginning. Most futsal players first pass the school of "big
soccer" and later they move to the futsal.
Another reason lies in the fact that during the practice of modern soccer, small-sided games
that are just one type of futsal, are often used because of the fact that they are conducted in
the area where the ratio of player is 4vs4, 5vs5, 5vs4, and which insists on strict player
markings. With this type of training soccer and futsal players are approaching the similar
structure of movement, so that the results gained in this study substantiate that fact.
5. References
Argilaga, A., & Jonsson, G.K. (2003). Detection of real-time patterns in sports: interactions
in football. International Journal of Computer Science in Sport, 2(2), 118-121.
Arnason, A., Sigurdsson, S.B., Gudmundsson, A., Holme, I., Engebretsen, L., & Bahr, R.
(2004). Physical fitness, injuries, and team performance in soccer. Medicine and
Science in Sports and Exercise, 36(2), 278-85.
Aziz, A., & Chin, M. (2000). The relationship between maximal oxygen uptake and
repeated sprint performance indices in field hockey and soccer players. Journal of
Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 40(3), 195–200.
Bangsbo, J., Norregaarg, L., & Thorso, F. (1991). Activity profile of competition soccer.
Canadian Journal of Sport Sciences, 16, 110-116.
Barbero-Alvarez, J.C., D’Otavio, S., Granda-Vera, J., & Castagna, C. (2009). Aerobic
fitness in futsal players of different competitive level. Journal of Strength and
Conditioning Research, 23(7), 2163-2166.
Barbero-Alvarez, J.C., Soto, V.M., Barbero-Alvarez, V., & Granda-Vera, J. (2008). Match
analysis and heart rate of futsal players during competition. Journal of Sports
Sciences, 26, 63–73.
Baros, R.M.L., Misuta, M.S., Menezes, R.P., Figueroa, P.J., Moura, F.A., Cunha, S.A.,
Anido, R., & Leite, N.J. (2007). Analyses of distances covered by first division
237
Brazilian soccer players obtained with an automatic tracking method. Journal of
Sports Science and Medicine, 6, 233-242.
Ben Abdelkrim, N., El Fazaa, S., & El Ati, J. (2007). Time-motion analysis and
physiological data of elite under-19-year-old basketball players during competition.
British Journal of Sports Medicine, 41(2), 69-75.
Bishovets, A., Gadijev, G., & Godik, M. (1993). Computer analysis of the effectiveness of
collective technical and tactical moves of footballers in the matches of 1988
Olympic and 1990 World Cup. In T. Reilly, J. Clarys & A. Stribbe (Eds.), Science
and Football II (pp. 232-236). London: E & FN Spon.
Bunc, V., & Psotta, R. (2001). Physiological profile of very young soccer players. Journal
of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 41, 337–41.
Burns, T. (2003). Holistic futsal: a total mind-body-spirit approach. New York: Lulu.
Casajus, J.A. (2001). Seasonal variation in fitness variables in professional soccer players.
Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 41(4), 463-9.
Castagna, C., D’Ottavio, S., Granda-Vera, J., & Barbero-Alvarez, J.C. (2008). Match
demands of professional Futsal: A case study. Journal of Science and Medicine in
Sport, 12(4), 490-4.
Chin, M.K., So, R.C., Yuan, Y.W., Li R.C., & Wong, A.S. (1994). Cardiorespiratory
fitness and isokinetic muscle strength of elite Asian junior soccer players. Journal
of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 34, 250–7.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New
York: Academic Press.
Da Silva, S.G., Kaiss, L., & Gomes, A.C. (1999). Differences in physiological and
anthropometric variables in Brazilian soccer players by field position.
Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 31, S296.
Da Silva, S.G., Osiecki, R, Arruda, M., Moura, J.A.A., & Se Campos, W. (2001). Changes
in anthropometric variables and in anaerobic power and capacity due to the training
season in professional Brazilian soccer players. Medicine and Science in
Sports and Exercise, 33, S158.
Doğramaci, S.N. and Watsford, M.L. (2006). A comparison of two different methods for
time-motion analysis in team sports. International Journal of Performance
Analysis in Sport, 6(1), 73–83.
Gallo, P.A., Ortega, D.R., Batista, J., & Liotta, G. (2002). Relationship between age,
biological maturity, body composite and physical fitness in youth argentinean
soccer players. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 34, S64.
Goncalves, J.T. (1998). The principles of Brazialian Soccer. Spring City: Reedswain Inc.
Gorostiaga, E.M., Llodio, I., Ibáñez, J., Granados, C., Navarro, I., Ruesta, M., Bonnabau,
H., & Izquierdo, M. (2009). Differences in physical fitness among indoor and
outdoor elite male soccer players. European Journal of Applied Physiology,
106(4), 483-91.
Guerra, I., Chaves, R., Tirapegui, J., & Barros, T. (2002). Assesment of body composition
in professional soccer players according to their positional roles. Medicine and
Science in Sports and Exercise, 36, S207.
238
Hartmann, U., Holzer, C., & Beetz, M. (2003, May). Match analysis by transmitter position
measurement. Paper presented at the meeting of the V World Congress of Science
and Football, Lisbon, Portugal.
Jerković, S., & Barišić, V. (1997, September). Situational analysis of the impact of some
parameters on the performance of the final matches of World Cup Italia '90. Paper
presented at the meeting of the Conditioning training, Dubrovnik, Croatia.
Kelly D.M., & Drust, B. (2009). The effect of pitch dimensions on heart rate responses and
technical demands of small-sided soccer games in elite players. Journal of Science
and Medicine in Sport, 12, 475–479.
Miljković, Z., & Barišić, V. (2002, September). Contribution to the comparative analysis
of play in terms of various football schools. Paper presented at the meeting of the
3rd International Scientific Conference on Kinesiology-New Perspectives, Opatija,
Croatia.
Reilly, T., Bangsbo, J., & Franks A. (2000). Anthropometric and physiological
predispositions for elite soccer. Journal of Sports Sciences, 18, 669-683.
Rienzi, E., Drust, B., Reilly, T., Carter, J.E., & Martin, A. (2000). Investigation of
anthropometric and work-rate profiles of elite South American international soccer
players. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 40,162–169.
Vaeyens, R., Lenoir, M., Williams, A.M., & Philippaerts, R.M. (2007). Mechanisms
underpinning successful decision making in skilled youth soccer players: an
analysis of visual search behaviours. Journal of Motor Behaviour, 39, 396-08.
Correspondence:
Mario Jovanovic,
Faculty of Kinesiology, Horvacanski zavoj 15, 10000 Zagreb.
tel: 00385 989404612
e-mail: mario.jovanovic@kif.hr
239