Background: The motor response to human visual stimuli is unique and differs from the reaction to light-based visual stimuli. While laboratory-based tests offer valuable insights into athletes’ basic perceptual–motor abilities, their translation to actual sports-specific tests is limited. Methods: Following a thorough warm-up, 44 collegiate-level male soccer players (age: 24.4 ± 2.5 y, mass: 63.01 ± 7.3 kg, stature: 167.62 ± 6.3 cm) from a tertiary institution completed the following tests: Sports Vision Test (20-light proactive speed test), 40 m sprint test (split times over 5, 10, 20 and 40 m), and a live Reactive Agility Test (RAT) entailing them to sprint, change direction either towards their dominant limb or non-dominant limb in response to a live tester, and sprint again. Results: Numerous moderate correlations were seen between the RAT and various sprint distances (r > 0.3, ES > 0.3, p < 0.05). The reaction speed relationship between the light-based (SVT) and live stimuli (RAT) test yielded a weak relationship (r > 0.4, ES > 0.5, p < 0.05). Furthermore, the light-based hand–eye coordination speed did not predict acceleration or top speed, while the total RAT time did explain 10.5% of top speed (40 m). No significant differences in the SVT average and total time were found among playing positions. Conclusions: The limited correlations observed indicate that light-based reaction training alone may not be sufficient to translate to field-based reactive agility; therefore, training should integrate perceptual–cognitive and motor demands. Future research should refine laboratory-based tests by incorporating contextual elements to enhance ecological validity and further investigate the transferability of these skills from controlled settings to real-world game scenarios.

The present study aimed to examine the effect of a quiet eye training (QET) intervention compared to a technical training (TT) intervention on the visual control and performance of rugby union goal-kickers. Male rugby union players ( n = 18, M_age = 21.35 years, SD = 2.03) were randomly assigned into a QET or TT group. Participants completed a pre-test, retention test 1, pressure test, and retention test 2 over six weeks, including a two-week intervention programme. The QET focussed on the QE and performance, while TT focussed on technical aspects of rugby goal-kicking. Each participant performed a total of 50 kicks that consisted of 15 kicks during the pre-test, retention test 1, and retention test 2, and five kicks during the pressure test. Using a Dikablis eye-tracker the QE was measured before (QE-pre), and during (QE-online), the run-up of the goal-kick. The results indicated that QE-pre durations increased from the pre-test to both retention tests and the pressure test for the QET group only (all p's < 0.05, all d's ≥ 0.08). The QET group also displayed longer QE-pre durations during the pressure and retention tests (all p's < 0.05, all d's ≥ 0.80), and longer QE-online durations during the pressure test ( d = 0.73), compared to the TT group. Finally, the QET group outperformed the TT group during the pressure test ( d = 0.72). Thus, overall, our results revealed that a short QET intervention benefitted attentional control and goal-kicking performance, particularly under high-pressure.

Understanding which performance indicators (PIs) positively affect the success of rugby sevens (RS), teams at university level might assist the coaching staff to optimally prepare for future matches and increase the likelihood of success. This study aimed to determine PIs that discriminate between winning and losing male University-level RS teams. Twenty (n = 20) round-robin matches of the 2018 Varsity sports rugby sevens tournament were analysed. A linear mixed model was used to determine statistically significant differences set at p < 0.05 while effect size was reported according to Cohen’s d. Results revealed that various PIs discriminated between winning and losing RS teams. Therefore, specific identified tactical aspects of RS should be prioritised to optimise performance.

Background: Sleep is a critical recovery mechanism for athletes, supporting hormonal regulation, muscle repair, and cognitive function. Dual-career athletes are particularly vulnerable to sleep disruption, which may impair performance and stress regulation. This study examined the effects of a 14-day sleep hygiene intervention protocol (SHIP) on aerobic and anaerobic performance, as well as anticipatory cortisol responses, in university-level soccer players. Methods: Thirty athletes (females: n = 14, 22.1 ± 3.3 y, 157.8 ± 6.0 cm, 53.5 ± 3.9 kg, males: n = 16, 21.5 ± 1.7 y, 167.5 ± 5.9 cm, 62.7 ± 5.4 kg) completed the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), provided pre-test salivary cortisol samples, and performed the Yo-Yo Intermittent Recovery Test Level 1 (YYIR1) and Repeated Anaerobic Sprint Test (RAST) before and after the intervention (adhering daily to 10–18 individualized sleep hygiene). Results: The SHIP significantly reduced sleep latency (p = 0.04) and increased sleep duration (p = 0.03), and PSQI scores (p < 0.001) in both sexes. Females showed marked increases in sleep duration (p = 0.002), while males showed improved latency (p = 0.07). Five behaviourally coherent clusters derived from the SHIP adherence explained a substantial proportion of variance (74.99%). Stimulant and metabolic regulation, and bedroom light and thermal environment control consistently predicted sprint and physiological outcomes (p < 0.05). Anticipatory cortisol decreased before both tests (p = 0.03–0.04). YYIR1 performance improved for the full cohort (p = 0.001). RAST times slowed slightly (p = 0.02), though fatigue index improved (p = 0.05). Conclusions: A short-term SHIP effectively enhanced sleep, reduced physiological stress, and improved key performance outcomes in collegiate athletes.

Background: The motor response to human visual stimuli is unique and differs from the reaction to light-based visual stimuli. While laboratory-based tests offer valuable insights into athletes' basic perceptual-motor abilities, their translation to actual sports-specific tests is limited. Methods: Following a thorough warm-up, 44 collegiate-level male soccer players (age: 24.4 ± 2.5y, mass: 63.01 ± 7.3kg, Stature: 167.62 ± 6.3cm) from a tertiary institution completed the following tests: Sports Vision Test (SVT - 20-light proactive speed test), 40m sprint test (split times over 5, 10, and 20m), and a live Reactive Agility Test (RAT) entailing them to sprint, change direction (left or right in response to a live tester) and sprint again. Results: Numerous moderate correlations were seen between the RAT and various sprint distances (r > 0.3, ES > 0.3, P < 0.05). The reaction speed relationship between the light-based (SVT) and live stimuli (RAT) test yielded a weak relationship (r > 0.4, ES > 0.5, P < 0.05). Furthermore, hand-eye coordination speed did not predict acceleration or top speed, while the total RAT time did explain 10.5% of top speed (40m). Conclusions: Although limited, the correlations observed between the reaction to light test, sprint speed, and reaction to visual stimuli encourage the training thereof to maintain attentional focus and situational awareness, skills deemed crucial for reacting effectively in dynamic game situations. Future studies should aim to adapt contextual factors of laboratory-based tests to improve ecological validity to further explore the transferability of skills from the laboratory to the field.