The current study verified the acute responses of participants to a football match in terms of blood markers. Sixteen elite U-18 male football players were divided into two groups: experimental (EG, n = 10), who played a friendly football match; and control (CG), who were not exposed to any physical exertion. Intravenous blood samples were collected from both groups at baseline, pre-match, half-time, and post-match. The blood analysis consisted of four groups: immunological (leukocytes, platelets, and cortisol), muscle damage (creatine kinase and lactate dehydrogenase), metabolic (lactate, glucose, erythrocytes, hematocrit, hemoglobin, and urea), and electrolytic (sodium, calcium, and potassium). Edwards’ training impulse demonstrated that the first half was more demanding than the second half (p = 0.020). Significant changes between time points and groups were observed for leukocytes (pre-match: 6920 ± 1949; post-match: 13,890 ± 3292; p ≤ 0.05) and cortisol (pre-match: 10.78 ± 3.63; post-match: 19.15 ± 7.40; p ≤ 0.05). CK (pre-match: 516.50 ± 248.38; post-match: 713.70 ± 308.20; p ≤ 0.05) and LDH (pre-match: 348.80 ± 36.49; post-match: 414.80 ± 26.55; p ≤ 0.05) increased significantly across the time points for the EG, with no difference between the groups, however. Raised lactate (pre-match: 1.05 ± 0.32; post-match: 3.24 ± 1.60; p ≤ 0.05) and glucose (pre-match: 72.54 ± 9.76; post-match: 101.42 ± 19.87; p ≤ 0.05) differences between the groups at half-time were also observed. These current findings provide helpful information to better understand football match demands regarding physiological effects.

Plyometric training is widely used to enhance explosive performance in youth athletes; however, the effects of adding elastic band resistance remain unclear. This randomised controlled trial compared elastic band-resisted plyometric training (EBPT), traditional plyometric training (PLT), and a control condition (CON) on jump performance in young male soccer players. Thirty-three players (age 14–15 years) were assigned to EBPT ( n = 10), PLT ( n = 11), or CON ( n = 12); both training groups completed a 6-week intervention (two sessions per week). Jump height and take-off velocity for squat jump, countermovement jump without and with arm swing (CMJ-NS, CMJ-AS), and dominant- and non-dominant-leg single-leg vertical jumps (SVJ-D, SVJ-ND) were analysed using mixed-design ANOVA; peak power and relative peak power were analysed using one-way ANCOVA with the pre-test value as covariate (with Quade's non-parametric rank ANCOVA where the homogeneity-of-regression-slopes assumption was violated). Groups were balanced for maturation at baseline (both p > 0.85). Significant time × group interactions emerged for CMJ-NS height ( p = .045), SVJ-D height ( p = .046), SVJ-ND height ( p = .010), and CMJ-NS take-off velocity ( p = .027). EBPT exceeded CON for CMJ-NS height and exceeded both CON and PLT for SVJ-D height. One-way ANCOVA showed that EBPT exceeded both PLT and CON for dominant single-leg peak power ( F (2, 29) = 13.81, p < .001, ηp ² = .49); for CMJ-NS peak power EBPT exceeded only the control (not PLT), and no relative peak-power outcome differed between groups, indicating that the absolute-power advantages were partly driven by body-mass differences and did not persist once power was normalised to body mass. EBPT preferentially enhances unilateral explosive performance, with its only advantage over traditional plyometrics in dominant single-leg jump height and peak power; for bilateral countermovement tasks, EBPT and traditional plyometrics produce comparable adaptations, supporting selective application aligned with training goals. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT07367230, Retrospectively registered.